Cadillac News: Cadillac Sees Global Sales Up 24.5 Percent In Dec. 2015, and 7.5% For the Year

[balthazar]

Up until the 80s.. Cadillac was the leader in luxury hands down. Not Benz, not BMW, not even Rolls held the same capabilities as Cadillac mass selling while still retaining tier one status. They became complacent.. and also decadent, leading them to where they are now. Some wish to blame the Diesel debacle, 4-6-8, or the Cimmaron, but in reality Cadillac's biggest faux pax was not CHANGING to what they are now when they were most relevant. Had Cadillac made the changes they started making with the CTS in 2003, in 1983, or even 1993, they would currently be viewed as a real Benz/BMW competitor, and would still own the American market, and most likely China, with a real presence in Europe too.

The catalyst is not singular, but the point in time these numerous events took place is the same; the early '80s. Roger Smith took away Divisional autonomy & Cadillac was largely left rudderless, which spawned some of the singular examples mentioned above. Loss of autonomy: '81-82, loss of Divisional engineering: '82, Cadillac diesels : '78, V8-6-4 : '81, Cimarron: '82, HT4100: '82, downsized Devilles: '85. Too much misdirection for image & position to bear at once.

 

Cadillac did pretty well with the early 90s STS- that's a solid equivalent to the CTS and laid the foundation for it. And they tried with the Cimarron, which was very favorably reviewed when new, that's another building block… but they didn't push hard enough there and the performance was not where it needed to be (period BMW competition was stone slow then). GM was still smarting from 'badge engineering shaming' in this period, and in hindsight the Cimarron's rep became totally negative, whereas the STS is the opposite. Point being, Cadillac has been working toward the 'Euro' angle for a long time… but if they had retained their autonomy & proprietary engineering, I believe they would have been farther along, much quicker.

[surreal1272]

Well VW will pay for it dearly now.  But you could pick a number of brands that turn a better profit than GM.  You need profit from the luxury brand, there needs to be greater focus on more Cadillac product and more Cadillac advertising.

Since you wanted to bring up profits, I though I would share this article with you which explains in very good detail why GM's profits are behind companies like Toyota. Inform yourself.

http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2015/05/09/why-cant-general-motors-earn-profits-like-toyotas.aspx

[G. David Felt]

Interesting read and they are right, GM is in recovery mode still and it will take time to get them to the same margin as Toyota.

[smk4565]

Toyota still out-earned GM several years ago when the Dollar to yen ratio was not as strong.  The Germans are more profitable than GM too, they aren't benefiting from the Yen.  My main point is GM could be a more profitable company if it had more Cadillac sales.  A profitable Cadillac division could carry the whole company, and offset the money losing European operation.

 

Which as a side bar, they should either sell the European operation totally, or go the One Ford route, and rename Opel and Vauxhall to Chevrolet, and make a global Spark, Sonic, Cruze, Malibu/Insignia, Camaro, Trax, Equinox line up that is the same in Europe, as it is in Asia, as it is in the USA.  

[Drew Dowdell]

Toyota still out-earned GM several years ago when the Dollar to yen ratio was not as strong.  The Germans are more profitable than GM too, they aren't benefiting from the Yen.  My main point is GM could be a more profitable company if it had more Cadillac sales.  A profitable Cadillac division could carry the whole company, and offset the money losing European operation.

 

Which as a side bar, they should either sell the European operation totally, or go the One Ford route, and rename Opel and Vauxhall to Chevrolet, and make a global Spark, Sonic, Cruze, Malibu/Insignia, Camaro, Trax, Equinox line up that is the same in Europe, as it is in Asia, as it is in the USA.  

 

Cadillac actually makes huge profits per unit. It's when you throw in the less profitable lower end models from other brand where average per car drops.   The reason the Germans make so much money is because they have managed to convince n00bs like you that their taxi cabs are premium.  It would be like if Ford shipped the Panther cars to Germany, only sold the top end packages with big motors and marked the price up $15k per unit... but the only way the Benz keeps the lights on is by fleeting the hell out of their bread-and-butter cars in Europe while inflating the prices here. 

 

Where GM loses money per unit is on cars like the Volt which is an experiment technologically, but also helps their CAFE, and on the small cars like Adam, Cruze, Sonic, Spark, which are necessary for doing business but have razer thin and sometimes negative margins. I wouldn't be surprised if GM also only made money on the mid-price and higher Malibu.  The Regal probably loses them money because of the limited sales in the US while being produced in the US, moving the Regal production back to Europe or over to China would be a smart business move there.

 

Opel/Buick/Holden is the "One GM" plan.  They've already found out that the Europeans won't buy Chevys. Euros also demand more premium feels in even their family cars, so it fits in well that Opel and Buick are paired. With nearly 1 million Buick sales in China last year, that gives Opel and Holden a whole bunch of breathing room on design costs.  Designers can switch out a badge and grille, and head to the bar for the rest of the afternoon.  Don't expect Opel to be losing money much longer, another year or two depending on the Russian economy and no other changes. 

[surreal1272]

Toyota still out-earned GM several years ago when the Dollar to yen ratio was not as strong.  The Germans are more profitable than GM too, they aren't benefiting from the Yen.  My main point is GM could be a more profitable company if it had more Cadillac sales.  A profitable Cadillac division could carry the whole company, and offset the money losing European operation.

 

Which as a side bar, they should either sell the European operation totally, or go the One Ford route, and rename Opel and Vauxhall to Chevrolet, and make a global Spark, Sonic, Cruze, Malibu/Insignia, Camaro, Trax, Equinox line up that is the same in Europe, as it is in Asia, as it is in the USA.  

You literally ignored EVERY OTHER FACTOR (like the bankruptcy, how Toyota exports, and to how their numbers are reported in the first place) in the article to focus only on the dollar. Oh and Germans are benefitting from the Euro so of course the Yen does not factor. DUH! 

Edited January 18, 2016 by surreal1272

[smk4565]

I know Cadillac makes profit and Opel does not.  This is why I would sell Opel, even if you sell it to FCA or Ford or VW for $1 be rid of it.  Holden/Opel/Buick isn't like the One Ford plan, it is still 4 brands if you count Vauxhall and they don't have the same product line up.

 

Also we know Cadillac makes a profit, why even make a Regal in the first place?  Why redo the Malibu ever 4 years when it won't sell anyway?  Pump money into Cadillac.  If GM made hybrid SUVs and pickups to boost their CAFE numbers they wouldn't need to sell Sparks and Sonics at a loss to offset the Silverado's gas mileage.

 

Cadillac should have 4 sedans (compact, small, medium, large), 3 coupes (small, medium, large) , 2 convertibles (small, medium), 1 sports car above Corvette, 4 crossovers (compact, small, medium, large), plus the Escalade, and everyone of those products should have a V-series, and everyone of those products should offer a plug-in or diesel engine option.  That should all be in show rooms by 2020.  Currently only the CT6 and XT5 fit that line up, and the Escalade could soldier on until 2020, and they can re-do it in 2021.   So they need 12 more models in 4 years, they need 3 brand new products per year.

 

They need a lot of product, that is where GM needs to put focus.  Why would you not put the most models in your most profitable brand?

Edited January 18, 2016 by smk4565

[surreal1272]

I know Cadillac makes profit and Opel does not.  This is why I would sell Opel, even if you sell it to FCA or Ford or VW for $1 be rid of it.  Holden/Opel/Buick isn't like the One Ford plan, it is still 4 brands if you count Vauxhall and they don't have the same product line up.

 

Also we know Cadillac makes a profit, why even make a Regal in the first place?  Why redo the Malibu ever 4 years when it won't sell anyway?  Pump money into Cadillac.  If GM made hybrid SUVs and pickups to boost their CAFE numbers they wouldn't need to sell Sparks and Sonics at a loss to offset the Silverado's gas mileage.

 

Cadillac should have 4 sedans (compact, small, medium, large), 3 coupes (small, medium, large) , 2 convertibles (small, medium), 1 sports car above Corvette, 4 crossovers (compact, small, medium, large), plus the Escalade, and everyone of those products should have a V-series, and everyone of those products should offer a plug-in or diesel engine option.  That should all be in show rooms by 2020.  Currently only the CT6 and XT5 fit that line up, and the Escalade could soldier on until 2020, and they can re-do it in 2021.   So they need 12 more models in 4 years, they need 3 brand new products per year.

 

They need a lot of product, that is where GM needs to put focus.  Why would you not put the most models in your most profitable brand?

Again, you have ignored every other factor that came into play here. Simply amazing. I've never seen goalposts with wheels built in to them. Must be why it's so easy for you to move them.

[smk4565]

What other factors?  GM needs profit, bankruptcy 7 years ago is not an excuse to not be profitable, especially when they argued that if the government bailed them out they would become a profitable company.

 

Regardless of what Toyota or Honda do, GM is not as profitable as they should be.  Ford is a more profitable automaker than GM as far as total dollars of income, and Ford has less revenue.  The easiest and best way for GM to improve profit margin is more Cadillacs.  

[G. David Felt]

I agree, Cadillac does need more models and they will have them soon. I realize not soon enough for you SMK. I also will have to disagree with you over FORD. With Fords DEBT load, if they really paid down what they borrowed they would not have a single profit. FORD has been lucky but could be even better if they went the bankruptcy route and dumped all the crazy obligations to unions and other crap to over paid executives and cleaned house. I truly think it would have been better to actually use the courts to right side and then prove that you did not need 7 years to get profitable.

 

GM is doing well, we all want more and expect more and I think they have the right CEO now to make it happen. I still question if Johan was the right person to lead Cadillac. I personally do not think so.

 

FCA is a mess we all know and agree on that. Sergio is an idiot and killing off the better brands all for trying to hold onto his stupid Italian ones.

[surreal1272]

What other factors?  GM needs profit, bankruptcy 7 years ago is not an excuse to not be profitable, especially when they argued that if the government bailed them out they would become a profitable company.

 

Regardless of what Toyota or Honda do, GM is not as profitable as they should be.  Ford is a more profitable automaker than GM as far as total dollars of income, and Ford has less revenue.  The easiest and best way for GM to improve profit margin is more Cadillacs.  

They are profitable and those margins have gone up every year since bankruptcy. Again, pay attention to the actual facts. That is also not the ONLY way for them to make more profit. Their trucks are proof of that alone.

 

And don't sit there and now try to dismiss Toyotas numbers. You brought it up and were corrected as to why those numbers are misleading. Admit you just pulled that out of your rear and own up to your error for once.

Edited January 19, 2016 by surreal1272

[Guest Wings4Life(BANNED)]

I agree, Cadillac does need more models and they will have them soon. I realize not soon enough for you SMK. I also will have to disagree with you over FORD. With Fords DEBT load, if they really paid down what they borrowed they would not have a single profit. FORD has been lucky but could be even better if they went the bankruptcy route and dumped all the crazy obligations to unions and other crap to over paid executives and cleaned house. I truly think it would have been better to actually use the courts to right side and then prove that you did not need 7 years to get profitable.

 

GM is doing well, we all want more and expect more and I think they have the right CEO now to make it happen. I still question if Johan was the right person to lead Cadillac. I personally do not think so.

 

FCA is a mess we all know and agree on that. Sergio is an idiot and killing off the better brands all for trying to hold onto his stupid Italian ones.

 

 

So you are more proud of GM for sticking it to the US taxpayer while also crushing the life savings of so many families......yet you frown on Ford for borrowing the old fashion way and paying it back huh?

 

Interesting.

[smk4565]

I am not a Johan fan either, I'd rather see Cadillac embrace their history rather than run from it.  I think Johan wants to make Cadillac like Audi, bring on the CT1 sedan, the XT1 and XT3 crossovers and go after urban buyers currently buying A3s and Q3s.  And yes you need small cars and crossovers, but Cadillac should be Cadillac, the company that made the first mass produced V8 engine, the company that made extravagant Eldorado convertibles, etc.  

 

Where GM has the big advantage over Ford is Cadillac.  Ford doesn't have a luxury brand that could be global (and by that I mean more than USA and China) and post strong volume.   Cadillac could mop the floor with Lincoln if GM would get Cadillac the product they need.  Imagine an Alpha crossover lined up against the MKC, and an Omega platform 3-row crossover in the $60,000 range, with the XT5 in the middle and Escalade at the top.

[smk4565]

 

What other factors?  GM needs profit, bankruptcy 7 years ago is not an excuse to not be profitable, especially when they argued that if the government bailed them out they would become a profitable company.

 

Regardless of what Toyota or Honda do, GM is not as profitable as they should be.  Ford is a more profitable automaker than GM as far as total dollars of income, and Ford has less revenue.  The easiest and best way for GM to improve profit margin is more Cadillacs.  

They are profitable and those margins have gone up every year since bankruptcy. Again, pay attention to the actual facts. That is also not the ONLY way for them to make more profit. Their trucks are proof of that alone.

 

And don't sit there and now try to dismiss Toyotas numbers. You brought it up and were corrected as to why those numbers are misleading. Admit you just pulled that out of your rear and own up to your error for once.

 

Even if you take away the currency manipulation and  yen exchange rates, Toyota is still kicking butt.  That article mentioned they get like 500 million from the yen exchange, even if it was $1 billion, they still made an $18 billion profit.  I don't like Toyota nor their products, but that company bankrolls cash.

 

I know GM makes their money on trucks, that is how the company has been since the 90s, all the profits came from trucks with Hummer, Escalade, the GMT360s, Silverado/Sierra, Aztek/Rendezvous, Colorado/Canyon, etc.  They had all those trucks in the early-mid 2000s and still went bankrupt.  Their trucks didn't save them then.  

 

If you look at the current GM lineup and current auto sales over all.  Crossovers, particularly small crossovers are growing, luxury segment is growing.  Pick-up trucks and full size SUV is sort of a flat market, plus you have new Tundra, Tacoma, Titan, Ridgeline hitting the pick up segments.  I don't think GM can hope to grow global Silverado sales 20%, but I do think they could grow global Cadillac sales by 50%.  And Cadillacs should have high profit margins.   If GM could sell 500,000 Cadillacs a year at $4,000 profit per vehicle that is $2 Billion in total profit.   If they sold 1 million Cadillacs that is $4 billion in profit, that is more than all of GM makes now.  That is why Cadillac is the most important brand GM has.

[balthazar]

smk- are you an accountant by trade?

[surreal1272]

 

 

What other factors?  GM needs profit, bankruptcy 7 years ago is not an excuse to not be profitable, especially when they argued that if the government bailed them out they would become a profitable company.

 

Regardless of what Toyota or Honda do, GM is not as profitable as they should be.  Ford is a more profitable automaker than GM as far as total dollars of income, and Ford has less revenue.  The easiest and best way for GM to improve profit margin is more Cadillacs.  

They are profitable and those margins have gone up every year since bankruptcy. Again, pay attention to the actual facts. That is also not the ONLY way for them to make more profit. Their trucks are proof of that alone.

 

And don't sit there and now try to dismiss Toyotas numbers. You brought it up and were corrected as to why those numbers are misleading. Admit you just pulled that out of your rear and own up to your error for once.

 

Even if you take away the currency manipulation and  yen exchange rates, Toyota is still kicking butt.  That article mentioned they get like 500 million from the yen exchange, even if it was $1 billion, they still made an $18 billion profit.  I don't like Toyota nor their products, but that company bankrolls cash.

 

I know GM makes their money on trucks, that is how the company has been since the 90s, all the profits came from trucks with Hummer, Escalade, the GMT360s, Silverado/Sierra, Aztek/Rendezvous, Colorado/Canyon, etc.  They had all those trucks in the early-mid 2000s and still went bankrupt.  Their trucks didn't save them then.  

 

If you look at the current GM lineup and current auto sales over all.  Crossovers, particularly small crossovers are growing, luxury segment is growing.  Pick-up trucks and full size SUV is sort of a flat market, plus you have new Tundra, Tacoma, Titan, Ridgeline hitting the pick up segments.  I don't think GM can hope to grow global Silverado sales 20%, but I do think they could grow global Cadillac sales by 50%.  And Cadillacs should have high profit margins.   If GM could sell 500,000 Cadillacs a year at $4,000 profit per vehicle that is $2 Billion in total profit.   If they sold 1 million Cadillacs that is $4 billion in profit, that is more than all of GM makes now.  That is why Cadillac is the most important brand GM has.

 

Stop, stop, just stop. Until you see the folly of this, just stop. Don't forget to grease those goalpost wheels though. Makes them easier to move.

 

BTW, GM has been in the middle of a $12 billion investment in 8 new Cadillac models for the rest of this decade so you have been misinforming yourself if you think GM hasn't been taking a more aggressive, i.e. more money making, approach to Cadillac's future. 

smk- are you an accountant by trade?

Sure doesn't seem like it but stranger things have happened.

[Suaviloquent]

Well the term he's trying to get at is contribution margin. I would like to see Cadillac sell Escalades in Gulf regions way more than they do now. That would kill it.

 

Ford had the unfortunate position of being in dire straits in 2006. Credit was still accessible for capital intensive firms like automakers, before there was a liquidity crisis, which led to the financial crisis and then companies had a very difficult time getting anything on commercial paper. 

 

Cadillac does have immense profit potential. I would also like to see the General weigh its priorities. If a customer that is into Buicks can be guided into a more expensive Cadillac - then I would be all for it.

[G. David Felt]

 

I agree, Cadillac does need more models and they will have them soon. I realize not soon enough for you SMK. I also will have to disagree with you over FORD. With Fords DEBT load, if they really paid down what they borrowed they would not have a single profit. FORD has been lucky but could be even better if they went the bankruptcy route and dumped all the crazy obligations to unions and other crap to over paid executives and cleaned house. I truly think it would have been better to actually use the courts to right side and then prove that you did not need 7 years to get profitable.

 

GM is doing well, we all want more and expect more and I think they have the right CEO now to make it happen. I still question if Johan was the right person to lead Cadillac. I personally do not think so.

 

FCA is a mess we all know and agree on that. Sergio is an idiot and killing off the better brands all for trying to hold onto his stupid Italian ones.

 

 

So you are more proud of GM for sticking it to the US taxpayer while also crushing the life savings of so many families......yet you frown on Ford for borrowing the old fashion way and paying it back huh?

 

Interesting.

 

 

Nope, I am not proud of sticking it to the tax payer, but at the same time, during a terrible time over all for the country, why not use the laws to clean up the books and turn the ship hard rather than slow.

 

The airplane industry has already abused the tax payer for the over paid pension funds that were dumped on us to allow United, AA and many others to still survive and have the tax payers cover the over kill on pension funds.

 

I just feel Ford should have used the same route to clean up and unload the pensions and move forward as all companies need to just endorce the 401K, dump pensions and move forward. Companies should have never offered the pensions to begin with.

[Guest Wings4Life(BANNED)]

 

 

I agree, Cadillac does need more models and they will have them soon. I realize not soon enough for you SMK. I also will have to disagree with you over FORD. With Fords DEBT load, if they really paid down what they borrowed they would not have a single profit. FORD has been lucky but could be even better if they went the bankruptcy route and dumped all the crazy obligations to unions and other crap to over paid executives and cleaned house. I truly think it would have been better to actually use the courts to right side and then prove that you did not need 7 years to get profitable.

 

GM is doing well, we all want more and expect more and I think they have the right CEO now to make it happen. I still question if Johan was the right person to lead Cadillac. I personally do not think so.

 

FCA is a mess we all know and agree on that. Sergio is an idiot and killing off the better brands all for trying to hold onto his stupid Italian ones.

 

 

So you are more proud of GM for sticking it to the US taxpayer while also crushing the life savings of so many families......yet you frown on Ford for borrowing the old fashion way and paying it back huh?

 

Interesting.

 

 

Nope, I am not proud of sticking it to the tax payer, but at the same time, during a terrible time over all for the country, why not use the laws to clean up the books and turn the ship hard rather than slow.

 

The airplane industry has already abused the tax payer for the over paid pension funds that were dumped on us to allow United, AA and many others to still survive and have the tax payers cover the over kill on pension funds.

 

I just feel Ford should have used the same route to clean up and unload the pensions and move forward as all companies need to just endorce the 401K, dump pensions and move forward. Companies should have never offered the pensions to begin with.

 

 

As someone who personally knows several families who lost a lot of money from GM taking advantage, 

I completely, 100% disagree.