Another Jerry Flint Column to Outrage Everyone

[ehaase]

I think he's right.

http://www.thecarconnection.com/Auto_News/...192.A10986.html

Back in my army days they used to tell us, "Take the high ground." It's better to be on top of the hill shooting down than on the bottom, climbing up.

I found this was true in the luxury car business, too. To succeed you had to take the high ground. Sell the higher-priced luxury car with the advanced technology, not the lower-priced one. Don't be worried about costing more. Glory in it.

Our Cadillac forgot this lesson long ago, went for volume, lost the high ground to Mercedes and Lexus and BMW, and really is no longer a luxury nameplate. It's what Buick used to be.

I recall long ago, a General Motors executive told me of his talking to a union leader at a now-shuttered Cadillac plant. The union man told the GM executive something like, "I hope you haven't raised the price much. I want to be able to afford another one."

The GM man told me he was thinking: "You SOB. You shouldn't be able to buy one in the first place."

Cadillac went for volume rather than exclusiveness. Now they pay the price.

Look at the new Lexus LS460 or the Mercedes CLS. They push past $70,000. Cadillac isn't there except with some of the "V" models, limited-volume cars to compete with the AMG and the S and the R and all the other special initial hot cars.

It's said but true. We all wrote about a Cadillac renaissance, but it's over. Look what's happened in the luxury field below. These figures count cars and SUVs.Lincoln is included as a laugh because Ford treats it like a joke.

2006-E 2005 2004 %

Cadillac 230,000 235,002 234,217 -2%

Lexus 325,000 302,895 287,927 +13%

BMW 275,000 266,200 260,079 +6%

Mercedes 245,000 224,269 221,366 +11%

Lincoln 118,000 123,207 139,016 -15%

BMW excludes MINI.

The estimates for this year may be off since the fourth quarter is an unknown and there are lots of new luxury models coming out. But the direction is clear. The foreign luxury brands are growing and Cadillac, at best, is standing still.

You could say that half of those Lexus models are "trucks," compared to only 35 percent of the Cadillacs. Or that more than 40 percent of BWW sales are the 3-Series while only a quarter of Cadillac sales are the CTS. But I'll stick to my guns. Its badge is getting a smaller share of the luxury badge group, and today's big money doesn't consider Cadillac in the luxury class - with one big exception - Escalade SUVs.

What's wrong with Cadillac?

For the most part Cadillac designs are boring compared to competitors. The Escalade is a huge exception, an "over the top" look that should have pointed the way, shown that Cadillac designs must be head-turning to win back customers. The CTS with its sharp edges was successful, too. But new models are designed to please - what? Even bankers want Lexuses nowadays. General Motors bureaucrats even eliminated Cadillac's own styling studio for a while, if you can image that. Pinching pennies and throwing away dollars. There was one exciting Cadillac design: the Sixteen show car. Of course, they aren't building it.

The Escalade and CTS were successful. But that's all. The SRX SUV sells around 20,000 a year; the STS rear-drive sedan is dropping toward 25,000. That's failure to me. The DTS, the renamed DeVille, sells around 65,000 a year, near the DeVille level. The Escalades are new this year and are holding their own. A new CTS is coming but it will be doing fine to match the success of today's model.

Cadillac failed to build a serious rear-drive large car. They did well by making the CTS rear-drive, but that's not a large car. Cadillac has two larger car models, the front-drive DTS and the rear-drive STS, which actually isn't so large. What they need is to do a great rear-drive car with take-your-breath-away looks. One model, not two. But GM isn't willing to invest. The fact is Cadillac never recovered from the GM decision to go front-drive, a mistake they have yet to correct.

I don't blame Cadillac's managers. They've done the best they can. GM's top management just hasn't been willing to create a real division, giving its leaders enough money and power to compete with Lexus and Mercedes and BMW. They went part of the way, but not nearly far enough. We still have Cadillacs using four-speed automatic transmissions.

What's sad is that Cadillac did have some momentum with the Escalade and CTS. But the moment is over and the division seems to be slipping farther behind the leaders as that chart shows. The luxury market continues to grow, but alas, our Cadillac isn't getting any of that growth.

Like John Greenleaf Whittier wrote:

For of all sad words of tongue or pen, the saddest are these: "It might have been."

[Flybrian]

Yeah. I just read that myself. I agree on the large RWD sedan aspect. DTS needs a successor now, not 2010. Though as is often the case, some of his points are valid, others aren't. Mercedes' massive growth comes at the cost of exclusivity as the brand is whored out to every ugly du-jour crossover or SUV. Lexus is riding off the backs of SUVs while their cars stagnate in the market. BMW milks the low-end with cheap low-mile leases to stupid MBA grads for all its worth.

[regfootball]

its just typical American business culture. Give people less of what they want over time by trying to cut corners and screw people out of real goodness. Then glitz it over with marketing and hope people don't notice.

Sometimes if we had fewer losers with MBA's running companies and more people who care about product, we'd be better off.

Cadillac HAS been slow with new models and could be in real danger again soon. The new CTS coming out soon by all looks like it has lost the edgy look of the original and even though it will be a better car, it looks like it will just blend in and will not attract younger buyers either.

oh well. Its not like Lincoln is doing ANYTHING so in comparison, Cadillac still has some cred.

[Northstar]

How can he say that the next CTS is not going to outsell the current one? Everything we've seen and heard suggests it's going to revolutionize everything in terms of design, it will have a kick-ass interior, excellent powertrains, and an improved suspension. How does that equal "doing fine to match the success of today's model"?

Reg, how has the new CTS lost its edgy look? The only thing we've seen without camo is the 60 minutes shot, and it still looks plenty edgy in that.

As for the other models, yes, Cadillac needs to get their act together on the STS and DTS.

I really think the Cadillac renaissance is just starting now. Sure, we had some turn around models, but look at the other vehicles GM was turning out then and how bad most of them were. Now, look at the non-Cadillacs GM is turning out today, and that tells you something about how good the new Cadillacs will be.

In the end, yes, Cadillac slowed down, but it's not like their product cycles have become abnormally long or anything. It just so happens they had everything redesigned/new at once that a gap in new product was bound to happen.

Finally, I don't think ragging on the SRX is acceptable. Yes, it didn't sell well, but it's won countless awards and comparos, so it's not like it's a bad product. It just didn't do well for whatever reason.

[toyoguy]

Lexus is riding off the backs of SUVs while their cars stagnate in the market.

207462[/snapback]

That's not true, Lexus SUV's sales are declining.

BMW milks the low-end with cheap low-mile leases to stupid MBA grads for all its worth.

207462[/snapback]

BMW does have good lease rates, but that also is partly because of high residual values.

[pow]

Given that GM invested like $2.99 into Cadillac, their current line-up isn't a bad effort.

They have more serious issues (like mainstream cars) to contend with first. Build the Camry-beater first before the S-class beater.

[regfootball]

Given that GM invested like $2.99 into Cadillac, their current line-up isn't a bad effort.

They have more serious issues (like mainstream cars) to contend with first. Build the Camry-beater first before the S-class beater.

207504[/snapback]

yes, i would agree to that

Reg, how has the new CTS lost its edgy look? The only thing we've seen without camo is the 60 minutes shot, and it still looks plenty edgy in that.

207475[/snapback]

hate to say it, but the new CTS looks a bit too sleek and soft, almost like it is trying to be a Lexus or something. It still has the same face, but what is appealing about the current gen cts (the slab sidedness and upright stance and boxy lines and crisp shapes and creases) seems toned down in favor of a more coke bottle like sides, a long and low look, and softened creases that could easily be found on a Lexus or any other luxocar. The worst thing is the possibility of those razor thin upright taillights and moving the license plate down to the bumper. What is so kick ass about the CTS now is the wide euro taillights, the tall blunt rear stance, sharp creases, short front overhang, brash character lines on the side, and the plate on the top of the decklid.

Honestly from all I've seen, the new CTS looks too much like its trying to be more what a cheesy Lexus buyer would buy. Soft and flabby.

and the current SRX can be ragged on because its a bit small, its too narrow visually, it doesn't look all that sporty (looks like a wagon more than anything) and it had a cheesy interior. So despite its great performance, it has lots of things buyers would call flaws, stuff the autorags don't pick up on.

Edited October 23, 2006 by regfootball

[pow]

Given that GM invested like $2.99 into Cadillac, their current line-up isn't a bad effort.

They have more serious issues (like mainstream cars) to contend with first. Build the Camry-beater first before the S-class beater.

207504[/snapback]

Ooops, I forgot about the STS. Taste and common sense cost nothing, yet they screwed up the styling and rear seat. Why do I have to slouch and tilt my head in the back of so many GM sedans?

[balthazar]

I like how Cadillac 'went for volume' yet mercedes has 9 SUVs and a minivan and a low $20K hatchback and tripled warranty costs and a fender-interchange program with mazda and yet it isn't ever on the pointy end of Flintstone's stick over the fire.

BTW- did jerry omit clarification that the "now-shuttered Cadillac plant"

was Clark Ave, 'shuttered' because Cadillac had built a brand new, thoroughly modern plant (Hamtamck) in 1985?..... giddy to leave the inference that it was "shuttered" to 'prove' his 'point' that Cadillac is in a 'decline'?

Someone warm jerry's milk, it's wa-aaay past his bedtime. Oh yea, and he's an ass-clown.

[Intrepidation]

It's a bummer the SRX is such a slow seller, it seems to win every comparison it's put in, and the new one's interior looks quite nice. The STS sells so badly it seems, I hardly seem them. I agree that Caddy needs a larger RWD sdean, they also need a coupe...and if teh CTS is getting bigger, then they need a new smaller car under it. And most of all, they need to stop being cheap about materials and anything else. It's a luxury brand...don't cheap out on anything. If it costs more, charge more...people will buy it.

[Flybrian]

There's nothing cheap about the materials in a CTS. They just don't ooze wood and leather luxury. Its not a Flying Spur, so I can accept that. I don't see why so many can't.

[sciguy_0504]

The materials may not be cheap but the design, IMO, is. The CTS interior is outclassed by all of its competitors, I think. The next-gen is a way different story.

[ZL-1]

The materials may not be cheap but the design, IMO, is.  The CTS interior is outclassed by all of its competitors, I think.  The next-gen is a way different story.

207705[/snapback]

I agree regarding the interior design. Tower PC isn't a nice inspiration, IMO...

Now for my 2 cents:

I believe that if one considers the STS and the SRX, Flint isn't very far off the mark. SRX appears to be an excellent vehicle that was hurt by pricing and by sharing an interior with the CTS at launch (thus sharing the complaints re that interior). From what I've been reading in these boards, the STS is a s-l-o-w seller and some might even call it a dud.

It's the new CTS and the next generation STS and SRX (I almost forgot the BRX) that will tell us if Cadillac has what it takes to climb closer to the luxury car references in image and pricing power.

[ZL-1]

The materials may not be cheap but the design, IMO, is.  The CTS interior is outclassed by all of its competitors, I think.  The next-gen is a way different story.

207705[/snapback]

I agree regarding the interior design. Tower PC isn't a nice inspiration, IMO...

Now for my 2 cents:

I believe that if one considers the STS and the SRX, Flint isn't very far off the mark. SRX appears to be an excellent vehicle that was hurt by pricing and by sharing an interior with the CTS at launch (thus sharing the complaints re that interior). From what I've been reading in these boards, the STS is a s-l-o-w seller and some might even call it a dud.

It's the new CTS and the next generation STS and SRX (I almost forgot the BRX) that will tell us if Cadillac has what it takes to climb closer to the luxury car references in image and pricing power.

[Cadillacfan]

His whole argument is flawed. Contrary to what many people(including Flinty-boy) think, GM isn't swimming in money at the moment. It hasn't been for some time now and vehicles that are built by GM are much more expensive then their Japanese and European counterparts due to healthcare costs and other various union dues. How many times must that point be crammed into the minds of these people?!?!?

He lacks common sense too. You don't just build a $100,000 sedan and put it to market when all you've been building for the past two decades were rebadged FWD sedans that share a lot with it's cheaper sister brands.

VW tried that approach with the Phaeton and failed miserably in the North American market. The main issue was that people here still think of VW as a german auto company that specializes in making fun, small, and affordable cars, not large, luxurious sedans that are priced to compete with the likes of Lexus, Mercedes, BMW, and Audi. $70,000 for a VW? Hell no. It may be a nice car, but people here buy luxury cars based on brand name and not the car itself. That's why you see people have to own BMWs or Mercedes no matter how bad/cheap the car might be.

Cadillac should build up it's volume vehicles by making them luxurious and sporty and then build an ultra-lux vehicle when the time is ready.

I do agree that the interiors are lacking but I bring up the money issue yet again. GM devoted a lot of money into the Cadillac brand and most of it was focused on exterior design and it's all-new RWD platform. Now that there is a set brand identity in place and performance is key to the future, Cadillac design teams can focus on improving the interiors and making them, at least, competitive to other cars in the Luxury segment.

[The O.C.]

Yeah. I just read that myself. I agree on the large RWD sedan aspect. DTS needs a successor now, not 2010. Though as is often the case, some of his points are valid, others aren't. Mercedes' massive growth comes at the cost of exclusivity as the brand is whored out to every ugly du-jour crossover or SUV. Lexus is riding off the backs of SUVs while their cars stagnate in the market. BMW milks the low-end with cheap low-mile leases to stupid MBA grads for all its worth.

207462[/snapback]

But like Flint said, it doesn't matter about Mercedes' crossovers or SUVs......or Lexus' SUVs.....or BMW's "cheap low mile leases"....

THEY are getting the job done.....increasing sales, growing marketshare.....

I think this article is absolutely spot-on and I can't fault any of Jerry's comments or concerns.

Can anyone argue that Escalade and CTS lead the way for Cadillac? Of course not....BUT....

.......can anyone argue that the current STS and SRX have been mediocre at BEST?

Can anyone argue that DTS has no place in the supposed-new Cadillac lineup?

Can anyone argue that Cadillac needed a 7-series/S-class competitor a LONG time ago?

Out in CA, Escalades and CTSs get respect.....and many times you see young guys and gals driving them.

Everything else in the Cadillac lineup? Almost exclusively blue-hairs.

[The O.C.]

There's nothing cheap about the materials in a CTS. They just don't ooze wood and leather luxury. Its not a Flying Spur, so I can accept that. I don't see why so many can't.

207662[/snapback]

Well, I have to disagree.

While I LOVE my car, and love the actual STYLING of the interior......the materials ARE pretty piss-poor.

Controls, knobs, switchgear are all really nice. It's the damn plastics that cover every seeming part of the interior dash, console, door panels, etc. That pimple-dimple $h!.

Every time I get in OCCarNut's '07 A4 3.2 Quattro, I get pissed at GM for the shabby interior materials on my CTS. Even the wood on the center stack is fake.....and looks it.....while the real wood on the wheel, shifter, and door pulls looks so much nicer.....it totally clashes with the center stack wood.

That being said, i guess I can at least say that it IS a unique look and feel from the actual design. I'd rather have the CTS interior DESIGN but the Audi's MATERIALS.

[The O.C.]

I do agree that the interiors are lacking but I bring up the money issue yet again.  GM devoted a lot of money into the Cadillac brand and most of it was focused on exterior design and it's all-new RWD platform. 

207739[/snapback]

Actually you are incorrect.......money WASN'T the issue with the interior design.

Lutz has publically stated that the CTS interior IS expensive and the materials used ARE costly.

The problem is that the execution of the materials is lacking. The dimple-pimple $h! LOOKS cheap.....but it's not.....it's actually expensive.

Somebody signed off on that interior that most-assuredly has no clue as to what denotes a high-quality look and feel to an interior. Did they even study the competition? One would think NOT.....

[Croc]

sign into the wrong screen name there, OC?

[Flybrian]

Well, you just contridicted yourself there. I'll conceded the CTS doesn't look luxurious in the traditional sense, but again, the material quality is there and I for one like the high-tech stealth look

[The O.C.]

sign into the wrong screen name there, OC?

207760[/snapback]

Yeah it's been that kind of month

<groan>

[The O.C.]

Well, you just contridicted yourself there. I'll conceded the CTS doesn't look luxurious in the traditional sense, but again, the material quality is there and I for one like the high-tech stealth look

207777[/snapback]

Not really.....

They still look and feel cheap......

But I have to stress.....I give it a pass because I really do like the DESIGN and STYLE of the interior.....and fit-and-finish looks to be superb.

I just don't like the plastics.....and the nasty fake wood on the center stack.

[turbo200]

Liking the looks of the interior on any car is purely subjective and semantics. get over it. Affirming that the materials are of the highest quality nature is not subjective; they may have been costly to use, but whoever approved using these costly rough feeling materials was smoking crack.

Flint is spot on with the first half, I don't have time to get into the second half of the article. The trendiest carmakers, the ones that get the most respect and adulation, the ones that end up selling more bottom-feeder cars based on reputation alone, are the ones that produce the most glorious upline cars. S-Class has been beating STS in sales for God's sake! That is a most glorious machine. CLS is one of the most beautiful sedans/coupes/whatever on the road period! ML SUV is still gorgeous and desirable. The next CL coupe is incredible. MB has attacked the upper region price points moreso than anybody in recent times, and their profit margins will show for it. Their reputation, as if it needed to get any better, is at its highest. Everybody in LA thinks that when you've arrived you buy a MB, well not everybody, just lemmings. Not only is this the thinking, but, gasp, they are actually making some of the most stylish designs on the road. Those bastards!

Where does this leave Cadillac? In the metaphorical dust. They may not seem too far behind to fans of this board, but they are. Luckily, they have created a lot of good will with the current look. NG CTS should build on that....BUT they need to REACT MORE QUICKLY with more cars, coupes, convertibles, sedans! To take advantage and build the brand's value MORE. They just don't get it apparently. MB is doing huge volume, and despite what everyone here may say about them, they are laughing all the way to the banks. And thier image keeps going up up up. Same is true of BMW, only they've stuck to more traditional routes.

Am I saying MB is perfect or free of mistakes? HEll no. Am I saying the R-Class is a work of art? Hell no. But by improving on every line SUBSTANTIALLY and building more niches, carving out more clientele, they are promising themselves a lengthy storied run at the top.

Cadillac is far far far behind. They are even behind Acura now. At least in terms of quality product that is helping to build perception. And the Escalade is getting too soft for me again. I like it, but I don't think it will be the massive hit it once was. It's not too late for Sixteen!

[Cadillacfan]

Actually you are incorrect.......money WASN'T the issue with the interior design.

Lutz has publically stated that the CTS interior IS expensive and the materials used ARE costly.

The problem is that the execution of the materials is lacking.  The dimple-pimple &#036;h&#33; LOOKS cheap.....but it's not.....it's actually expensive.

Somebody signed off on that interior that most-assuredly has no clue as to what denotes a high-quality look and feel to an interior.  Did they even study the competition?  One would think NOT.....

207758[/snapback]

I'm sure if they had more money devoted to the interior, the design would've been well thought-out and attractive because the current one looks like a rush job that contains a mish-mash of ideas along with an expensive radio/hvac unit. It seemed as though it was the very last thing developed and they used the money left after they designed the exterior. It's typical of US automakers to not pay attention fully to interior design and quality. With Lutz, the money has shifted to where it counts and now that they already have a platform and styling to start off with, it makes the interior a much easier task then before.

[CARBIZ]

I think you would all have to agree that from where Cadillac was 5 years ago, it has come along way. As usual, however, so has everyone else.

Still, I think that if you compare the leaps GM has made recently with respect to vehicles like the Aura and the upcoming Enclave, it bodes well for future Cadillacs. It does make me wonder a little bit about development money being spread too thin (think Equinox/Torrent!), but if MB keeps building crap, the sheeple will come around. Eventually.

It is all a cycle. Everyone's gotta have a MB or Bimmer. That, too, will change.

[97regalGS]

I think you would all have to agree that from where Cadillac was 5 years ago, it has come along way.  As usual, however, so has everyone else.

Still, I think that if you compare the leaps GM has made recently with respect to vehicles like the Aura and the upcoming Enclave, it bodes well for future Cadillacs.  It does make me wonder a little bit about development money being spread too thin (think Equinox/Torrent!), but if MB keeps building crap, the sheeple will come around.  Eventually.

  It is all a cycle.  Everyone's gotta have a MB or Bimmer.  That, too, will change.

207848[/snapback]

will it? and if so, how fast?

Imagine if the SRX and STS had been successful. Imagine if the SRX 2007 interior was in there initially, and it had been priced a little more aggresively. Imagine if the STS hadn't been so watered down and plain boring. Imagine if Zeta was available earlier and the DTS had it's debut as RWD instead of a new nose and ass (& interior)on the Deville.

Instead of just a slow turnaround, started by original Escalade and CTS, (followed by a long gap) to be modestly continued with the NG Escalade and NG CTS, we might actually have a revival, or re-birth.

Alas, we can only hope that GM has far more in store Cadillac that what seems likely.

[CARBIZ]

I don't think a quarter million units is anything to sneeze at. Sure, it would have been nice to hold on to 50% market share, like Cadillac once enjoyed, but even then Cadillac sold - get ready for this, a QUARTER MILLION UNITS.

The market has matured. People's tastes have changed. Anyone under 35 is not going to understand the allure of the '67 Eldorado. You had to be there to understand. Today, there is a dizzying array of AWD, FWD, RWD - who would have thought of putting leather seats and a sun roof in a glorified pick up truck 40 years ago????

Now, everyone wants to pay stupid money for stupid vehicles. I park my car near a ravine in Rosedale (the toniest old neighborhood in Canada) a lot to walk my dog, and the other day every vehicle within sight was either an X3, X5 or BMW 5 series - oh, and once Lexus convertible!

They were all blue-black, too. That is just silly.

[97regalGS]

I don't think a quarter million units is anything to sneeze at.  Sure, it would have been nice to hold on to 50% market share, like Cadillac once enjoyed, but even then Cadillac sold - get ready for this, a QUARTER MILLION UNITS.

  The market has matured.  People's tastes have changed.  Anyone under 35 is not going to understand the allure of the '67 Eldorado.  You had to be there to understand.  Today, there is a dizzying array of AWD, FWD, RWD - who would have thought of putting leather seats and a sun roof in a glorified pick up truck 40 years ago????

  Now, everyone wants to pay stupid money for stupid vehicles.  I park my car near a ravine in Rosedale (the toniest old neighborhood in Canada) a lot to walk my dog, and the other day every vehicle within sight was either an X3, X5 or BMW 5 series - oh, and once Lexus convertible!

  They were all blue-black, too. That is just silly.

207869[/snapback]

but wouldn't you rather those BMW's were Cadillacs?????

[regfootball]

what this stil tells me is Cadillac, GM, and the other domestics still chintz out big time on interiors and haven't digested the message yet that stunning interiors is what sells cars almost more than anything else.

[gmcbob]

Jerry is okay. I actually wrote him an email today and he responded to me, to my utter chagrin.

What's weird is that the STS is selling about as many units as the Lexus GS as far as I can tell from the sales ticker reports. Isn't that one of the key direct competitors for that car? I see more GS's on the road here in Houston than I do STS', but that doesn't surprise me as Lexus and Toyota sell real well here in Houston anyway. Is 20-25k STS' a year that bad if Lexus is doing about the same with the GS?

[tama z71]

meh. i used to like this guy, but more and more his work slobbers over its own drowsy self.

[balthazar]

Is 20-25k STS' a year that bad if Lexus is doing about the same with the GS?

Of course it's bad, because'OK" Jerry needs something to whine about under false pretenses. And the japanese makes can do no wrong.

I don't think a quarter million units is anything to sneeze at. Sure, it would have been nice to hold on to 50% market share, like Cadillac once enjoyed, but even then Cadillac sold - get ready for this, a QUARTER MILLION UNITS.

Cadillac had to have controlled far greater than a mere 50% of the market at one point. Historical top volume year was '78: 383,xxx units. But you are correct: the traditional annual volume is in the 250K range.

The market has matured. People's tastes have changed. Anyone under 35 is not going to understand the allure of the '67 Eldorado.

Nonsense; just look at the car! Absolutely stunning.

What I would like to see is mercedes' and Cadillac's volume divided by number of different models- merce seems to have an overwhelming quantity of models...

Edited October 24, 2006 by balthazar

[pow]

What I would like to see is mercedes' and Cadillac's volume divided by number of different models- merce seems to have an overwhelming quantity of models...

208018[/snapback]

US YTD 2006

Small

C: 36,771

CLK: 12,481

CTS: 42,794

Midsize

E: 33,266

CLS: 8,156

STS: 20,002

Large

S: 22,601

CL: 919

DTS: 44,555

Sports

SL: 6,913

SLK: 8,623

SLR McLaren: N/A

XLR: 2,487

Midsize SUV

ML: 21,790

R: 14,313

SRX: 17,229

Large SUV

GL: 10,939

G: 494

Escalade: 27,259

ESV: 10,994

EXT: 6,572

Of course this isn't the best measure of profitability. Caddy's best-selling car, the DTS, is fleeted at 30%, heavily incentivized, and costs half as much as a S-class.

Both a new C-class and CTS are arriving as '08s, and there will be a CTS coupe to compete against the CLK. Ditto the BLX to compete against the upcoming MLK. Merc also has the new '07 CL. A STS refresh is rumored for '08(?)

[Northstar]

I think he meant take the number of vehicles Mercedes sells and divide it by the number of models they have. Then, do the same for Cadillac. Of course many of MB's models are high-end and therefore don't sell in large numbers.

[regfootball]

caddy really needs more than just escalades, cts, sts, srx, dts, xlr. it needs maybe at least 10 different models.

2 roadsters

3-4 sedans

3-4 suv/crossovers

something along the lines of the Cien

1-2 coupes

If they could settle in around 350,000 units with that many models that would be cool but its likely to hard to achieve, so I see why they need to scale back.

Edited October 24, 2006 by regfootball

[turbo200]

US YTD 2006

Small

C: 36,771

CLK: 12,481

CTS: 42,794

Midsize

E: 33,266

CLS: 8,156

STS: 20,002

Large

S: 22,601

CL: 919

DTS: 44,555

Sports

SL: 6,913

SLK: 8,623

SLR McLaren: N/A

XLR: 2,487

Midsize SUV

ML: 21,790

R: 14,313

SRX: 17,229

Large SUV

GL: 10,939

G: 494

Escalade: 27,259

ESV: 10,994

EXT: 6,572

Of course this isn't the best measure of profitability. Caddy's best-selling car, the DTS, is fleeted at 30%, heavily incentivized, and costs half as much as a S-class.

Both a new C-class and CTS are arriving as '08s, and there will be a CTS coupe to compete against the CLK. Ditto the BLX to compete against the upcoming MLK. Merc also has the new '07 CL. A STS refresh is rumored for '08(?)

208045[/snapback]

When it is broken it on a model by model basis, it is clear Cadillac is not doing that poorly. DTS is heavily fleeted, CTS is at about 8% fleet and STS must be somewhere around that figure, perhaps much higher than 8%, maybe in the teens. Don't know how MB compares in that arena, however it is clear where Cadillac leaves off in the price scales, MB roars ahead. The point is to see how much MORE Caddy could be doing just by having more models, AND substantially improving on thier main lines and making them true viable competitors, i.e. remaking CTS STS SRX which are in dire need of remakes all of them. Adding the upcoming BRX, CTC, and line above STS [here's hoping], will do great things for the line as well. Cadillac just needs to hurry up and get with the times. GM needs either more money, or more fluid planning. The Kappa platform should have accomodated a small RWD sedan for Caddy long ago to compete with the likes of TSX, in the 28k-up region, and to give CTS breathing room to start around 35k. [And now we here of it coming, but the mistake is no room for a V6....another mistake waiting to happen, unless they can make it light enough, and push Ecotec to 300 hp.] Caddy Kappa roadster with a soft top and a turbo Ecotec pushing 300 hp should also have arrived long ago. STS and SRX are lameducks, they need complete overhauls with less stodgy images next time around. DTS sells but at the cost of image; really an STS or CTS could pick up the slack for this range of cars; Caddy doesn't need it sucking the life out of thier image. They need coupes and convertibles for God's sake; the most stylish types of vehicles and you're going to deprive the luxury make of impractical, irrational purchase luxury cars??! Escalade needs to become an alluminum version of Lambda in its next iteration, something that evokes all of the bold and proud brash attitude a Cadillac should in a slightly sportier more innovative package than what is out there today....or Zeta on stilts.....gotta get you to think out of the box GM. Escalade where it is today, to me, looks like it will be dead in the water in three years, there are simply too many stylish, fun, luxurious, bold choices out there for the luxury dollars, and the current Escalade, as nice as it is, represents old school thinking. Make it a sportier machine with more efficient standards. Do this in a four or five year timespan, get the current one redone soon. Finally they need an ultra luxury coupe and sedan, along the lines of S-Class and new SL [God that car is gorgeous], and then a sedan that would be totally impractical, long, and sleek, with a low roofline, to compete with CLS. That car is too beautiful to not be done in as many renditions as possible.

Design design design....there are too many attractive cars coming from other automakers to stand still. The new XK coupe is one of the most impractical cars on the market, and yet I see it everywhere already. It's a thing of beauty, panache, and taste....it represents what the rich and wealthy think is posh and elegant. Cadillac needs to go there. Where it is today is not there at all.

On a side note, Escalades seem to be doing pretty well this year, can someone post the comparison with last year's figures?

[red]

I'm with Jerry - the STS and SRX weren't good enough.

The STS has a great platform & great powertrain, but it is just too timid inside and out. To get noticed, a car has got to be bold, and that boldness has to have fantastic execution - the Imaj still looks fresh IMO. The STS was admittedly a clean-up job, and constrained by past-innefficient product develop systems. This next STS has to really be the standard of the world - no excuses this time.

The SRX is a class-leading performer, but again the styling was too timid. Again, hampered by a bad product development, Cadillac kept changing and changing the original SRX, adding costs and delays. The original A&S edge was watered down, a third row was added (causing a major change in design), but thankfully the car's ride height was raised. Again, this new system better result in a complete SRX next go-round...they're getting the interior part right as evidenced in the MCE. We'll see if Cadillac designers have the cojones to not let anyone (especially Lutz) water down the next S's.

I think the new CTS is impressive, from what photos we've seen. Designwise, it's not as revolutionary as the original, the door panels seem a little too plain, and the interior appears to have some late-round cost cutting. However, these gripes won't hold down what appears to be an awesome American car. The interior is still significantly upgraded with some (competitevely) unique materials, the overall shape is faster and more squat, and (hopefully) they stick with the fantastic detail of the grill and headlights as previewed on 60 minutes. In conclusion, I disagree with Jerry on the next CTS...this baby's got hit all over it.

As a final thought, GM advanced design should be hard at work on the next A&S, that is, the next big Cadillac styling theme. Hopefully, an entirely different, equally revolutionary, and highly differentiated design theme (relative to GM brands) will emerge soon, rather than let the current A&S "evolve" itself into a corner - as many design themes do.

[razoredge]

Cadillac doesnt need more cars. They are a sector of a diverse corporation and do not need to appeal to all audiences. Lets leave some damn room for B U I C K AND P O N T I A C....OK ! They need a higher standard of stying...inside and out. I never thought the CTS was that HOT ! or the rest of them, either. Inside or out. It lacks some amount of stylistic appeal. How do I say ?....its like comparing the art work of a grade school student to a seasoned professional. This could be said of all of GM's styling. They are so close yet somehow come off looking to be designed by the guy that didnt get hired by the competition....ah....which I suspect is the case.

They had better take a good hard look at that 57 & 67 Eldorado... and get a clue. If they dont have what it takes, to take ones breath away with brilliance they have been a huge waste of money, because most of the money people will always walk right past them for something inspiring and classy.

Maybe the "new" stuff is going to get the job done...maybe it isnt. I for one am getting sick and tired of waiting for the next disappointment.

"Coulda, shoulda, woulda, didnt ! Instead we offer this 75% complete product for your curious amusement. We are far to distracted playing Hollywood superhero to pay attention to the details........"

Edited October 24, 2006 by razoredge

[red]

I completely agree that Cadillac should not expand its US range with smaller, lower priced vehicles. The way for Cadillac to increase its sales and long-term viability is by investing more in the product it currently has.

That means: no 3-series competitor, no small SUV.

There are many arguments for maintaining Cadillac's current price position and product range. The most obvious reason is that GM's other sub-lux divisions, such as Buick, GMC, and Saab, would have a greater benefit. GMC/Saab could share the small-lux-SUV, Saab and Pontiac or Buick could share the small RWD platform. The result is stronger P/B/GMC/Saab product, priced slightly higher, but much more competitive.

Furthermore, no one - and I mean no one - has ever topped the 3-series. The G35 came damn close, but as they say, no cigar. With significantly higher costs and little experience in the RWD compact market, what makes anyone think Cadillac can do better? At this point, it does not make sense for Cadillac to invest in a product that won't maintain the brand's aspirational qualities. Additionally, the current Cadillac styling theme is nearly impossible to transfer to a small car - witness the BLS. Big and bold does not work with cars of this size.

So that's it, Cadillac. Keep reinventing yourself. Maintain your position and move upmarket. Increase the boldness of your styling. And let the little guys - P/B/GMC & Saab - have some breathing room.

[The O.C.]

So that's it, Cadillac.  Keep reinventing yourself.  Maintain your position and move upmarket.  Increase the boldness of your styling.  And let the little guys - P/B/GMC & Saab - have some breathing room.

208121[/snapback]

Problem is......the "yuppies", young-to-middle-age executives, and all the other high-end import intenders are NOT (generally) going to be seen in something wearing a Pontiac, Buick, GMC, or even maybe Saab badge.

Cadillac is GM's ONLY shot right now of seriously capturing the appeal of these consumers. GM is on the cusp of letting all of that slip away.

It's true that I DO see in southern California a fair number of CTS drivers that would fit perfectly in a 3-series, C-class, A4, IS350, or G35 (this IS a good thing.) But what happens to those consumers when they decide after their three-year lease is up that they want to upgrade?

Where do they go? STS? DTS? You've got to be kidding me.

Those people are LEAVING Cadillac and moving to (or back to) BMW, Benz, Audi, Lexus, or Infiniti.

Even I have to admit that my next car after my CTS will be either the new CTS, or the new 335i twin-turbo coupe. Point is....Cadillac (and GM) could lose me three years from now......unless the new CTS really IS spectacular....or they come out with a truly outstanding new STS.

[97regalGS]

Problem is......the "yuppies", young-to-middle-age executives, and all the other high-end import intenders are NOT (generally) going to be seen in something wearing a Pontiac, Buick, GMC, or even maybe Saab badge.

Cadillac is GM's ONLY shot right now of seriously capturing the appeal of these consumers.  GM is on the cusp of letting all of that slip away.

It's true that I DO see in southern California a fair number of CTS drivers that would fit perfectly in a 3-series, C-class, A4, IS350, or G35 (this IS a good thing.)  But what happens to those consumers when they decide after their three-year lease is up that they want to upgrade?

Where do they go?  STS?  DTS?  You've got to be kidding me.

Those people are LEAVING Cadillac and moving to (or back to) BMW, Benz, Audi, Lexus, or Infiniti.

Even I have to admit that my next car after my CTS will be either the new CTS, or the new 335i twin-turbo coupe.  Point is....Cadillac (and GM) could lose me three years from now......unless the new CTS really IS spectacular....or they come out with a truly outstanding new STS.

208185[/snapback]

some good points. however, how many people actually 'move up' the car ladder with every purchase?

[regfootball]

around here, what sells like fire are A4's and BMW 3's.

Acura does well here with TL's but that's because they are front drive.

I love the fact that the current CTS compares with the 3 series, yet is more suited in size to the big fat American.

to me then, that does leave a void for a 'BLS'; a TSX sized competitor. It should have available AWD. But it should only exist in low numbers in the US. 15,000-20,000 TOPS. and they should all be loaded. It should have a companion crossover or wagon version, like an X3.

The current CTS should go on in the exact same size and price classes its in now. A coupe should accompany it.

There needs to exist an AWD/RWD platform for the next STS and DTS. They should be large cars. The STS should be A6 sized. A tish bigger than the 5 series. Sort of the size of a Lexus GS with more rear room. The DTS could be built on the same platform, just be larger and more formal, closer in size to the 7 series etc. That same platform could spawn the two crossovers I would imagine, a mid sized and an mid large sized one. Sort of to battle the Lexus RX and GX's of the world.

Keep the escalade as an icon, as long as some folks buy it. it's like GM's "G wagon"

The XLR concept is fine. helps fund further corvette refinements. Just please make it as desirable as the Merc. SL.

I would love a Cien type car as a halo.

A cadillac 16 type car would be awesome also, but that would only work if the $$ are flowing. That car could be a large 16 cylinder aluminum bodied whoop ass car.

My CTS would give more size etc. than the 3 series for price. near 5 series accomodations for 3 series price.

My BLS would would approach the total package of a 3 series, for less money. The CTS would be the big volume car, followed by the DTS replacement. The RWD/AWD DTS would be a same type of car as now, lots of room and features lot of car great price. The AWD/RWD STS becomes the mid-large killer sport sedan....i.e. 5 series competitor but a bit larger and maybe a bit less costly. The DTS and STS are almost polar opposites, but yet still caddy. The STS would maybe sell up to 40,000 a year but the DTS would go for volume.

Edited October 24, 2006 by regfootball

[97regalGS]

My CTS would give more size etc. than the 3 series for price.  near 5 series accomodations for 3 series price.

My BLS would would approach the total package of a 3 series, for less money. 

The RWD/AWD DTS would be a same type of car as now, lots of room and features lot of car great price. 

The AWD/RWD STS becomes the mid-large killer sport sedan....i.e. 5 series competitor but a bit larger and maybe a bit less costly. 

208311[/snapback]

so, you want Cadillac to be the Wal-Mart of the Luxury market? Great luxury cars at everyday low prices?

nothing like setting your sights at mediocre.

[razoredge]

A6 is large ? 5 series is large ?

OC......whats wrong with the STS for a "move up" ? I prefer its exterior to the CTS. I know the interior is questionable but what all about the car is wrong ?

Then whats wrong with the CTS V for an upward move ?

These are serious questions, I dont shop these cars because they are out of my league. I just look at them and peak in the windows. I would just like to hear whats wrong compared to competition.

Lastly I would like to say BS to the "they arent going to buy a Buick". That would depend on what kind of Buick, Buick could bring to market. I just dont believe, regardless of the past 2 decades that the name Buick is off the radar. I believe the name still carrys an awsome amount of clout, especially if the machine is there. The name itself demands attention, has a thick sound, a quality sound. Buick ! Even younger people today still know what Buick is supposed to represent. Many have had the opportunity to polish off old high mileage, LeSabres, Regals and Park Avenues, even Rivieras. I know there are younger guys out there that have respect for Buick. Someday they will have arrived and will still remember their old beat up but reliable and sweet Buick. This is not something to ignore.

Ive been saying for years that this small BMW type of car belongs to Buick. Theres no need to destroy this division by ignoring its origional and true calling. The current attack or lack there of, is going to do just that. Going fast with class... is Buick, Iron fist in a velvet glove..is Buick.

say the names

Buick.....

Cadillac....

sorry but to me, Buick just has a sound to it, masculine but classy, gentleman demanding respect

Cadillac sounds like a wood duck call..............

Let Caddy work on their full size upperend stunner

Let Buick get this new Zeta platform and really get the job done. Dont put a choke collar on them so Caddy can "rule" or Chevy can "rule" thereby making Buick once again come out looking lame. For goodness sake let Buick be Buick again and keep saturin and Caddy the hell out of the way.

[turbo200]

some good points.  however, how many people actually 'move up' the car ladder with every purchase?

208237[/snapback]

and there will always be new entry level buyers. it leaves room for Caddy to be successful as long as the CTS is good......this doesn't nullify the point of STS, SRX, and all others needing to be as good in execution as the competition in order to keep that great momentum going. Though I know you don't disagree with that either.

[turbo200]

A6 is large ? 5 series is large ?

OC......whats wrong with the STS for a "move up" ? I prefer its exterior to the CTS. I know the interior is questionable but what all about the car is wrong ?

Then whats wrong with the CTS V for an upward move ?

These are serious questions, I dont shop these cars because they are out of my league. I just look at them and peak in the windows. I would just like to hear whats wrong compared to competition.

you aren't a serious buyer and therefore haven't  looked at the alternatives. The alternatives offer more class more luxury more technology more taste. The alternatives with thier class and panache all have much more appeal and a higher image on the pecking order. The STS is easy to get enthusiastic about....before the time of the current 5-series, M45, CLS, A6, etc etc

Lastly I would like to say BS to the "they arent going to buy a Buick". That would depend on what kind of Buick, Buick could bring to market. I just dont believe, regardless of the past 2 decades that the name Buick is off the radar. I believe the name still carrys an awsome amount of clout, especially if the machine is there. The name itself demands attention, has a thick sound, a quality sound. Buick ! Even younger people today still know what Buick is supposed to represent. Many have had the opportunity to polish off old high mileage, LeSabres, Regals and Park Avenues, even Rivieras. I know there are younger guys out there that have respect for Buick. Someday they will have arrived and will still remember their old beat up but reliable and sweet Buick. This is not something to ignore. 

What kind of survey have you conducted to know this?

208373[/snapback]

[razoredge]

Im a old Buick owner and have spent much time on various Buick forums ove the past 7 years and know the various owners views.

"What type of surveys have I conducted" ? Get real ! I sure as hell hope you are not starting on me.

I said " I dont shop these cars because they are out of my league." I didnt need you to rewrite it, and shove it back at me. Once again, let me say, I sure as hell hope you are not starting on me !

I have also peered at Mercedes and BMW and know what I can see inside is miles apart, outside, not so much on the STS body, but thats my taste. I was asking OC himself why he said "STS, you gotta be kiddin me " he is a CTS owner and I want to know how the STS translates into "you got to be kiddin me". Actually items, not some bombardment of fancy words that repeat what I said in an earlier post.

[regfootball]

so, you want Cadillac to be the Wal-Mart of the Luxury market?  Great luxury cars at everyday low prices?

nothing like setting your sights at mediocre.

208337[/snapback]

lou sir, you really think cadillac will survive pining for the 80,000 dollar market?

UM, NO, scott. not anytime soon. you have to be realistic. Audi can't even sell extreme luxury cars in volume. ONLY mercedes and BMW commnd big coin. People who like Lexus even balk at their high prices.

what's wrong with a darn good 55,000-60,000 dollar large DTS? A large Zeta with a 400hp northstar, mercedes ride quality, and kickass interior is hardly walmart? WTF are u smoking?

Edited October 25, 2006 by regfootball

[regfootball]

Im a old Buick owner and have spent much time on various Buick forums ove the past 7 years and know the various owners views.

"What type of surveys have I conducted" ? Get real ! I sure as hell hope you are not starting on me.

I said " I dont shop these cars because they are out of my league." I didnt need you to rewrite it, and shove it back at me. Once again, let me say, I sure as hell hope you are not starting on me !

I have also peered at Mercedes and BMW and know what I can see inside is miles apart, outside, not so much on the STS body, but thats my taste. I was asking OC himself why he said "STS, you gotta be kiddin me " he is a CTS owner and I want to know how the STS translates into "you got to be kiddin me". Actually items, not some bombardment of fancy words that repeat what I said in an earlier post.

208460[/snapback]

the STS' interior and interior space and ergonomics do not cut it for a midsize luxury car, unfortunately. its just not up to the level yet that is expected by well off 'me-s' who throw their jing at expensive cars.

Face it, interiors is still the number one reason why luxury cars are luxury cars. BMW may be the exception to that. People want a nice throne to set their ass every day to drive their car to their high stress desk job.

[razoredge]

Yea ! It always seemed funny to me why they would build both the CTS and STS on the same chassis/platform. They are so obviously similar sitting side by side in a showroom. That is how I decided I liked the STS sheet metal much better, but not the price. The interiors are a snooze, much like Pontiacs.

I liked my buddies 535's (if thats what it is) interior more than its exterior. He said it was a dog compared to their old turbo A6.