What does Cadillac mean to you?

[Scout]

[Suaviloquent]

Ya got busted on the dealership front right that there SMK.

[G. David Felt]

Honda and Toyota have stand alone dealers too. (Now that Scion is dead . Most car brands have their own building. It is industry common place. Which is why Cadillac should have stand alone dealers, and most Cadillac dealers are stand alone.

I have always said dealership amenities and customer service are important for the service department because people have a lot of alternatives to take their vehicle to for service.

I don't think the dealership plays a big role in the sales decision. If ABC Lexus has the nicest building in the world and XYZ Lexus 40 minutes away is mediocre but has that RX350 in the color you want for $2,000 less than ABC dealership has it, guess what, the customer is driving for the better deal, and the building didn't matter.

An awful dealership can hurt sales, but I think for the most part dealerships are all about the same and aren't winning sales.

 

So with what you have stated, which dealership would you be attracted to go to:

 

Cadillac China

 

 

Mercedes-Benz China

 

 

Humans are emotional and the first impression visually does make a difference.

[ccap41]

Mercedes, duh. Because everything Mercedes is better than everything else. Period. 

[smk4565]

If the dealership was so important then Cadillac or Lincoln or Jaguar could just build luxury dealerships and get sales. It doesn't work like that. Copying Lexus's dealership experience would be a lot cheaper than copying their car line.

Rahal owns a Jaguar/Land Rover dealership about 3 miles away from their Mercedes dealership, and the Jaguar dealership is newer and nicer, I would assume equal service since it is the same owner. But they sell a lot more Mercedes than JLR.

[balthazar]

Because nobody buys jaguars, they sell like lamborghini's in the U.S.

[surreal1272]

If the dealership was so important then Cadillac or Lincoln or Jaguar could just build luxury dealerships and get sales. It doesn't work like that. Copying Lexus's dealership experience would be a lot cheaper than copying their car line.

Rahal owns a Jaguar/Land Rover dealership about 3 miles away from their Mercedes dealership, and the Jaguar dealership is newer and nicer, I would assume equal service since it is the same owner. But they sell a lot more Mercedes than JLR.

Really?

I really have no words for your obliviousness on this subject.

Let me just sum this up for you. Dealerships and how they are presented ABSOLUTELY MATTER to most car buyers. If they didn't, then all dealerships would never change, never renovate or update their facilities, and never move their product around within their dealerships. However, they do all that thus killing this weak argument you keep trying to push because you got busted on what Mercedes sells beside their S Class cars.

Edited April 27, 2016 by surreal1272

[surreal1272]

Because nobody buys jaguars, they sell like lamborghini's in the U.S.

He also fails to realize that DUH, of course Mercedes will sell more. They have three times the brand volume of Jaguar. To compare those two as proof of his argument is just weak sauce on a bull$h! sandwich.

[balthazar]

In the U.S., mercedes has like EIGHTEEN TIMES the sales volume.

 

Thanks, Cap't Obvious.

[smk4565]

Mercedes and Lexus have better dealerships than Cadillac, but that isn't why Mercedes and Lexus beat Cadillac.

 

Cadillac's marketing is bad, the product line incomplete, and the ATS uncompetitive in the high volume entry-lex segment.  CTS sells comparable to a GS or A6, you can live with the CTS's sales volume, although more would help.  But when your brand has 2 coupes (if the ELR is still around), 1 crossover and 0 convertibles, you have a product problem, and there is a management problem for letting the brand go this long without essential product.

[balthazar]

Again, you are stuck on the same, tired, singular point, of course : toyota-level sales of luxury cars.

 

ATS is absolutely competitive, PRODUCT-WISE. There is a sedan, a coupe, a V-Sport and a V- that's a solid line-up. 

 

And reality-check :: NO ONE buys a sedan because there is ALSO a convertible model available. That's as ridiculous as saying people buy sprinters because there is an s-class.

And for YOU, convertibles are a non-entity, because THEY DON'T SELL.

 

I think it'd be cool to have a ATS and CT6 convertible, but the volume is excruciatingly low.
Again; to your mindset; they aren't going to change the SALES NEEDLE @ Cadillac, no matter how often you claim that's why Cadillac's volume is where it is.

[smk4565]

I am not saying that convertibles will help sell more sedans, but there are a number of buyers out there that want a convertible.  So if you want that body style, Cadillac isn't even on the radar.  Yes it is a small segment, but you can't just ignore it totally.  It would help the image of the brand also to have a convertible. 

 

 

Best news of the day is that Cadillac is planning a car based on the Cruze, that will be priced in the mid $20s with a 1.5 liter turbo and a 2.0 turbo range topper to compete with the CLA.  Everyone wants to trash the CLA, yet Cadillac seems like they need to build a competitor for it.  

[Suaviloquent]

The new Cruze is more of a luxury car than the CLA ever will be. Yeah the CLA has some performance variants, which are also dispatched by the Audi A3.

 

If GM made a Cadillac off of it, I would not be surprised, but I would be bewildered as it would be totally redundant.

[oldshurst442]

I am not saying that convertibles will help sell more sedans, but there are a number of buyers out there that want a convertible.  So if you want that body style, Cadillac isn't even on the radar.  Yes it is a small segment, but you can't just ignore it totally.  It would help the image of the brand also to have a convertible. 

 

 

Best news of the day is that Cadillac is planning a car based on the Cruze, that will be priced in the mid $20s with a 1.5 liter turbo and a 2.0 turbo range topper to compete with the CLA.  Everyone wants to trash the CLA, yet Cadillac seems like they need to build a competitor for it.  

Yet....there are people out there who are hungry for Cadillac to be Cadillac.

 

Peter De Lorenzo has targeted his latest rant at Cadillac.

He touches up on certain topics we discussed....

 

This is a paragraph or two from his latest rant:

http://www.autoextremist.com/

 

As I said last week, you have to remember that Cadillac has exactly one grand-slam home run product: the Escalade. This unapologetically bold machine is the only product in the Cadillac lineup that has true crossover appeal, in that well-heeled buyers predisposed to owning expensive luxury cars regularly shop – and buy – the Escalade. Believe it or not there are people out there who are hungry for Cadillac to be Cadillac. In fact they’re expecting it. And the only machine that makes that kind of on-the-road statement is the Escalade.

Yes, the “V-Series” cars (ATS and CTS) are superb machines, but their appeal extends to a smattering of enthusiasts who understand what they’re getting, which is a level of high-performance rivaling the very best entries from Germany, a noteworthy accomplishment by GM’s True Believers, to be sure, but not enough to sustain the brand on its own.

But the rest of the lineup? Not so much. The new XT5 shows promise, but it should have been called the Escalade S in order to capitalize on the Escalade’s name recognition and reputation. “XT5” is just another garbled, alphanumeric mishmash nameplate in the marketplace that means less than zero to the average consumer.

As for the civilian ATS and CTS, the two blend together visually on the road to the point that most people only understand the difference with coaching. And the two cars are stepping on each other price-wise at the dealer level, which only adds to the confusion. To top it all off, the new, highly-touted CT6, which looks for all the world like a stretched CTS, is another Cadillac entry that threatens to blend in, too, what with its “restrained” design and already dismally forgettable marketing.

 

 

 

 

The bold part was of my concern last week...

 

The dealership question.

A stand alone dealership is most definitely a must.

And it has to be a luxurious one where the sales staff are real PROFESSIONALS and NOT like used car guys...

 

The product portfolio should be the PRIMARY focus though.

And in my eyes, ATS and sub-ATS vehicles should NOT be the focus either...

Yes, some volume cars are needed...my thought process still remains that JDN needs to push cars that people ASSOCIATE Cadillac with....with REAL names....

 

Peter De Lorenzo brings up another point....name recognition......

Who the phoque knows what a CT6 is?

Who the phoque will care actually?

 

But....give the people a Ciel and an El Miraj (with those names!), and problems of perception might actually go away...

Like Peter De Lorenzo says...the only Cadillac car that is a GRAND SLAM is neither a small, nimble Euro fighting machine nor has an Alphanumeric name....

 

Food for thought,

And it happens to be the same message I keep pluggin' since I first posted this thread...

 

Are you still reading this, Casa?

 

 

Because I havent changed my stance and low and behold, Ive got a dedicated blow hard that has a weekly blog, who actually shares some of my thought processes...

 

 

PS: my clown suit has been washed and pressed and ready for you to wear...

Edited April 28, 2016 by oldshurst442

[Suaviloquent]

Again, you are stuck on the same, tired, singular point, of course : toyota-level sales of luxury cars.

 

ATS is absolutely competitive, PRODUCT-WISE. There is a sedan, a coupe, a V-Sport and a V- that's a solid line-up. 

 

And reality-check :: NO ONE buys a sedan because there is ALSO a convertible model available. That's as ridiculous as saying people buy sprinters because there is an s-class.

And for YOU, convertibles are a non-entity, because THEY DON'T SELL.

 

I think it'd be cool to have a ATS and CT6 convertible, but the volume is excruciatingly low.

Again; to your mindset; they aren't going to change the SALES NEEDLE @ Cadillac, no matter how often you claim that's why Cadillac's volume is where it is.

 

 

I would disagree, the ATS while having the needed variants, is not competitive as it could be. GM bench-marked the last true good BMW to build it, which allowed BMW to throw the curve-ball of a more livable back seat in the F30, and Mercedes with the C-Class upped the ante with the best interior in its class.

 

Being astronomically priced, it still is the favorite in this class. I think the Mercedes is a compelling option, though I would not get an ATS. I would get a Camaro, and pocket the extra $35k w/out getting into a comparable C-Class.

 

I wand Cadillac to get that break-through vehicle, kinda like the Camaro against the Mustang. You know, better enough to force the hand of the other automakers, and I mean cream them into oblivion.

[smk4565]

The Cruze is a luxury car?  It isn't even comparable to an Acura ILX, let alone a CLA.    I am not a CLA fan, but the CLA45 does do 0-60 in 4.5 seconds, that is as fast as a CTS V-sport, so it isn't a slouch car.  Even the base car does 0-60 in 6.9 seconds and the interior is what you would expect for a low $30k car.   I don't really see what the Audi A3 does any better, I think the Audi interior is more sparse than the CLA.

[balthazar]

I am not saying that convertibles will help sell more sedans, but there are a number of buyers out there that want a convertible.  So if you want that body style, Cadillac isn't even on the radar.  Yes it is a small segment, but you can't just ignore it totally.  It would help the image of the brand also to have a convertible. 

 

Best news of the day is that Cadillac is planning a car based on the Cruze, that will be priced in the mid $20s with a 1.5 liter turbo and a 2.0 turbo range topper to compete with the CLA.  Everyone wants to trash the CLA, yet Cadillac seems like they need to build a competitor for it.  

The "small segment" is a couple hundred buyers. Yes, it 'can' be ignored.

And if having a convertible doesn't sell any more sedans/coupes, and almost no convertibles themselves sell, how does it "help" in any measurable way?

 

General Motors has rebuked the 'Cruze-based future Cadillac', so Cadillac has decided they DON'T need a competitor. 

Edited April 28, 2016 by balthazar

[balthazar]

 

Again, you are stuck on the same, tired, singular point, of course : toyota-level sales of luxury cars.

 

ATS is absolutely competitive, PRODUCT-WISE. There is a sedan, a coupe, a V-Sport and a V- that's a solid line-up. 

 

And reality-check :: NO ONE buys a sedan because there is ALSO a convertible model available. That's as ridiculous as saying people buy sprinters because there is an s-class.

And for YOU, convertibles are a non-entity, because THEY DON'T SELL.

 

I think it'd be cool to have a ATS and CT6 convertible, but the volume is excruciatingly low.

Again; to your mindset; they aren't going to change the SALES NEEDLE @ Cadillac, no matter how often you claim that's why Cadillac's volume is where it is.

 

I would disagree, the ATS while having the needed variants, is not competitive as it could be. GM bench-marked the last true good BMW to build it, which allowed BMW to throw the curve-ball of a more livable back seat in the F30, and Mercedes with the C-Class upped the ante with the best interior in its class.

But Cadillac made a "more livable" FRONT seat than the 3/4-series. Will BMW 'respond'?

Will BMW up the ante WRT mercedes & the 3/4's lackluster interior?

[Suaviloquent]

The only way convertibles now work is if they pay for themselves. No more subsidized the building of a product because it'll fit nicely or whatever.

 

I don't like how Mercedes seems to now make one of everything, but you look at how they're so gloriously expensive even after some of the incentives you can get...they seem to be corralling what is left of those markets.

[Suaviloquent]

 

 

Again, you are stuck on the same, tired, singular point, of course : toyota-level sales of luxury cars.

 

ATS is absolutely competitive, PRODUCT-WISE. There is a sedan, a coupe, a V-Sport and a V- that's a solid line-up. 

 

And reality-check :: NO ONE buys a sedan because there is ALSO a convertible model available. That's as ridiculous as saying people buy sprinters because there is an s-class.

And for YOU, convertibles are a non-entity, because THEY DON'T SELL.

 

I think it'd be cool to have a ATS and CT6 convertible, but the volume is excruciatingly low.

Again; to your mindset; they aren't going to change the SALES NEEDLE @ Cadillac, no matter how often you claim that's why Cadillac's volume is where it is.

 

I would disagree, the ATS while having the needed variants, is not competitive as it could be. GM bench-marked the last true good BMW to build it, which allowed BMW to throw the curve-ball of a more livable back seat in the F30, and Mercedes with the C-Class upped the ante with the best interior in its class.

But Cadillac made a "more livable" FRONT seat than the 3/4-series. Will BMW 'respond'?

Will BMW up the ante WRT mercedes & the 3/4's lackluster interior?

 

 

What I'm saying is that the Cadillac should be the car that Cadillac needs. It should not be a car that attempts to beat a German car, because if the German car changes - well Cadillac will have to follow again.

 

BMW makes comfortable front thrones, they just a charge a lot for them.

 

Yeah, the new the C-Class is ripping it up in terms of sales and probably clobbering the 3 Series a lot. 

 

BMW is in a bind right now.

[balthazar]

The Cruze is a luxury car?  It isn't even comparable to an Acura ILX, let alone a CLA.    I am not a CLA fan, but the CLA45 does do 0-60 in 4.5 seconds, that is as fast as a CTS V-sport, so it isn't a slouch car.  Even the base car does 0-60 in 6.9 seconds and the interior is what you would expect for a low $30k car.   I don't really see what the Audi A3 does any better, I think the Audi interior is more sparse than the CLA.

Is the CLA a luxury car??

 

 

 

Not seeing much to differentiate mercedes playing in Chevrolet's sandbox.

[balthazar]

What I'm saying is that the Cadillac should be the car that Cadillac needs. It should not be a car that attempts to beat a German car, because if the German car changes - well Cadillac will have to follow again.

BMW makes comfortable front thrones, they just a charge a lot for them.

Cadillac is not following the German siblings (who follow EACH OTHER much more urgently).

What it is doing is fitting into particular segments, segments not invented by nor owned by the Germans siblings.

 

BMW's 3/4-series has a more cramped FRONT compartment than the ATS….

[smk4565]

DeLorenzo nailed it.  The Escalade is their one grand slam product, and it is big, heavy, V8, has a word name, etc.  It is the opposite their other products.   The Escalade is riding high now in times of cheap gas, there is risk there if gas gets expensive or the economy tanks.  But they could easily put a V6 hybrid system or something in an Escalade to get the fuel economy up if they had to.

 

The rest of the line needs work, they need word names, they need marketing.  The alphabet soup names are forgotten among consumers, the ads aren't drawing people in or moving the needle.

[Suaviloquent]

Balth that may be a nice finding, but it's never been an issue of the measured numbers, it was always a rule of thumb.

 

Yes, the BMW AWD system takes room from the driver, but people complain more about the ATS backseat than they do the front of the 3/4 Series.

 

But why a small sedan needs a great backseat when the next model up solves the problem anyways...I'll never understand.

[smk4565]

 

I am not saying that convertibles will help sell more sedans, but there are a number of buyers out there that want a convertible.  So if you want that body style, Cadillac isn't even on the radar.  Yes it is a small segment, but you can't just ignore it totally.  It would help the image of the brand also to have a convertible. 

 

Best news of the day is that Cadillac is planning a car based on the Cruze, that will be priced in the mid $20s with a 1.5 liter turbo and a 2.0 turbo range topper to compete with the CLA.  Everyone wants to trash the CLA, yet Cadillac seems like they need to build a competitor for it.  

The "small segment" is a couple hundred buyers. Yes, it 'can' be ignored.

And if having a convertible doesn't sell any more sedans/coupes, and almost no convertibles themselves sell, how does it "help" in any measurable way?

 

General Motors has rebuked the 'Cruze-based future Cadillac', so Cadillac has decided they DON'T need a competitor. 

 

The convertible is something that looks good in a commercial or on a dealer lot.  So it can draw people in, help with brand image. From that stand point it could help overall sales.  I don't think having an E-class convertible helps sell E-class sedans directly.    But if a luxury buyer wants a convertible with a back seat, they basically have Mercedes, the A5 and 4-series as their choices.  Not sure if Lexus or Infiniti still make a convertible.   If you want a 2 seater, there is Porsche, Jaguar, Z4, etc a few more options.  But Cadillac can't just ignore convertibles and not even attempt to bring in those buyers.  You have to at least offer a product to get people to consider the brand.

 

Chevy has 2 convertibles, even Buick has one.  Cadillac should have at least 1, probably 2.

[Suaviloquent]

The only thing that the CLA has on the Cruze is the availability of leather on the dash and doors with wood trim and much better looking guages.

 

But that's just not a good value for a car that costs close to $15,000 more than a base Cruze. 

 

A fully loaded Cruze is $29,000, more car for the money, by a LARGE margin than the woeful base CLA.

[smk4565]

The Cruze is dog slow.  If the Cruze was as good as a CLA, but $10-15,000 less, then it should be whipping the Focus, Civic, Corolla in sales, everyone would want one. Cruze is no better than the other cars in that segment.

 

I also think the back seat is not the reason the ATS doesn't sell.  I think the badge on the grille is the #1 reason, #2 is the exterior look is a bit bland, and #3 is the interior overall isn't that great.  Audi and Lexus are better, Mercedes way better, and the 3-series has a class average interior, but it has such a loyal following it gets away with it.

[smk4565]

C-class sales were up 15% last year, and they only had the sedan body style, they are adding coupe and convertible, and a hybrid this year.  So the CLA isn't stealing sales from it, and the CLA isn't hurting the Mercedes brand image either.  The CLA isn't anywhere near as good as a C-class, but when you compare a CLA to an A3, or an Acura ILX or 1-series it doesn't look so bad.  If nothing else the CLA helps their CAFE number, they need something to do it.

[balthazar]

The convertible is something that looks good in a commercial or on a dealer lot.  So it can draw people in, help with brand image. From that stand point it could help overall sales.  I don't think having an E-class convertible helps sell E-class sedans directly.    But if a luxury buyer wants a convertible with a back seat, they basically have Mercedes, the A5 and 4-series as their choices.  Not sure if Lexus or Infiniti still make a convertible.   If you want a 2 seater, there is Porsche, Jaguar, Z4, etc a few more options.  But Cadillac can't just ignore convertibles and not even attempt to bring in those buyers.  You have to at least offer a product to get people to consider the brand.

Chevy has 2 convertibles, even Buick has one.  Cadillac should have at least 1, probably 2.

 

If an e-class convert doesn't sell any more sedans, what other models are MB buyers buying because there's an e-class convert?

You contradict yourself at whiplash speed.

 

But Cadillac can't just ignore convertibles and not even attempt to bring in those buyers.

All 250 of them? Are you sure??

 

Chevy has 2 convertibles, even Buick has one.  Cadillac should have at least 1, probably 2.

Chevrolet is a full-line brand. They also have volume as their guiding mantra. That is not true on either count for Cadillac, and -as you admitted- a convert isn't going to change sales at all.

I'm still looking for your factual reason for wanting 2 Cadillac converts.

Like I said, it could be cool to see, but it doesn't fit your criteria (SALESSALESSALES) at all.

CLA in above pics had dreadfully bland gauges, vs. the Cruze. Dated, also.

[surreal1272]

While SMK is trying to move the bar again, I just wanted to point out that as I was passing by the MB dealership, I posted a picture of the other day, I saw that they moved the vans right next to the entrance of the building.

[surreal1272]

Mercedes and Lexus have better dealerships than Cadillac, but that isn't why Mercedes and Lexus beat Cadillac.

 

Cadillac's marketing is bad, the product line incomplete, and the ATS uncompetitive in the high volume entry-lex segment.  CTS sells comparable to a GS or A6, you can live with the CTS's sales volume, although more would help.  But when your brand has 2 coupes (if the ELR is still around), 1 crossover and 0 convertibles, you have a product problem, and there is a management problem for letting the brand go this long without essential product.

Dude you just literally have to stop with the damn bar moving. You are literally the only one here who thinks dealerships are not that important when it has been proven to you(on multiple occasions I might add) how wrong you are. Sorry but you don't get to move the bar here anymore. Accept that you were and continue to be wrong and find some thing original to say.

[surreal1272]

I am not saying that convertibles will help sell more sedans, but there are a number of buyers out there that want a convertible.  So if you want that body style, Cadillac isn't even on the radar.  Yes it is a small segment, but you can't just ignore it totally.  It would help the image of the brand also to have a convertible. 

 

 

Best news of the day is that Cadillac is planning a car based on the Cruze, that will be priced in the mid $20s with a 1.5 liter turbo and a 2.0 turbo range topper to compete with the CLA.  Everyone wants to trash the CLA, yet Cadillac seems like they need to build a competitor for it.

Well considering how much better a well appointed Cruze interior looks compared to a $30K CLA, that should worry you a lot. Go ahead and debate that but those two pictures posted are worth a thousand words.

[surreal1272]

DeLorenzo nailed it.  The Escalade is their one grand slam product, and it is big, heavy, V8, has a word name, etc.  It is the opposite their other products.   The Escalade is riding high now in times of cheap gas, there is risk there if gas gets expensive or the economy tanks.  But they could easily put a V6 hybrid system or something in an Escalade to get the fuel economy up if they had to.

 

The rest of the line needs work, they need word names, they need marketing.  The alphabet soup names are forgotten among consumers, the ads aren't drawing people in or moving the needle.

For $h!s sake bar mover. They don't need name changes. They need more variants and CUVs, of which you agree with not even three damn days ago. Pick a stance and stick with it.

[balthazar]

While SMK is trying to move the bar again, I just wanted to point out that as I was passing by the MB dealership, I posted a picture of the other day, I saw that they moved the vans right next to the entrance of the building.

Of course, because MB follows revenue above all else!

 

March 2016 ~

cla-class : DOWN 28%

c-class : DOWN 13%

e-class : DOWN 19%

s-class : DOWN 36%

 

VANS :: UP 29%

 

Expect to see increasing emphasis / dealer stock on from the etherial "van division" of Daimler in the coming year as the rest of the brand is entering a sales 'slide'.

Edited April 28, 2016 by balthazar

[ccap41]

 

DeLorenzo nailed it.  The Escalade is their one grand slam product, and it is big, heavy, V8, has a word name, etc.  It is the opposite their other products.   The Escalade is riding high now in times of cheap gas, there is risk there if gas gets expensive or the economy tanks.  But they could easily put a V6 hybrid system or something in an Escalade to get the fuel economy up if they had to.

 

The rest of the line needs work, they need word names, they need marketing.  The alphabet soup names are forgotten among consumers, the ads aren't drawing people in or moving the needle.

For $h!s sake bar mover. They don't need name changes. They need more variants and CUVs, of which you agree with not even three damn days ago. Pick a stance and stick with it.

 

I think there is only 2 Mercedes with real names and both of them are work vehicles. Unimog. Sprinter. 

 

Yeah Cadillac needs names. THAT is their problem. 

[G. David Felt]

 

While SMK is trying to move the bar again, I just wanted to point out that as I was passing by the MB dealership, I posted a picture of the other day, I saw that they moved the vans right next to the entrance of the building.

Of course, because MB follows revenue above all else!

 

March 2016 ~

cla-class : DOWN 28%

c-class : DOWN 13%

e-class : DOWN 19%

s-class : DOWN 36%

 

VANS :: UP 29%

 

Expect to see increasing emphasis / dealer stock on from the etherial "van division" of Daimler in the coming year as the rest of the brand is entering a sales 'slide'.

 

Do not forget the rebadged Nissan Truck that will show up along side the vans for sales s

[smk4565]

Cadillac and Mercedes or BMw are not the same. The 3-series has been around 35 years, the Mercedes SL for 60 years the S-class for 50 or so years. They have consistancy of that naming convention and those products.

Cadillac had a history of word names, people don't know CT6 or XT5, they are easily forgettable. It is like when Pontiac introduced the G6, no one knew what a G6 was but they knew Grand Am. I have long said I think Cadillac is better with word names, just like I was glad to see Lincoln bring back Continental, it is just too bad it is wrong wheel drive.

Cadillac has done a good job making stand alone showrooms in recent years, I think their dealerships are fine. Maybe they aren't as large or luxurious as Lexus's but I don't think it matters.

We all know Cadillac needs crossovers badly and they have some on the way. I think they need a convertible too because convertibles are aspirational products, and a luxury brand is aspirational. This can relate to when 1/3 of CTS sales were coupes. Take away the coupe and a buyer wanting a 2 door car just goes elsewhere.

[smk4565]

While SMK is trying to move the bar again, I just wanted to point out that as I was passing by the MB dealership, I posted a picture of the other day, I saw that they moved the vans right next to the entrance of the building.

Of course, because MB follows revenue above all else!

 

March 2016 ~

cla-class : DOWN 28%

c-class : DOWN 13%

e-class : DOWN 19%

s-class : DOWN 36%

 

VANS :: UP 29%

 

Expect to see increasing emphasis / dealer stock on from the etherial "van division" of Daimler in the coming year as the rest of the brand is entering a sales 'slide'.

Do not forget the rebadged Nissan Truck that will show up along side the vans for sales s

A one month snap shot, E-class is on a model change over, C-class adding 2 body styles this year. They'll stabilize, but sedan sales are dropping, crossovers are rising.

The overall luxury sedan market was down like 15% last year.

[smk4565]

March 2016

GLA up 15%

GLK/GLC up 97%

GLE up 17%

Hmm, good thing they saw the crossover boom coming and were prepared.

[G. David Felt]

^^^^^

 

How is FWD wrong wheel drived when Audi as well as BMW and MB have sold plenty of FWD appliances?

[ccap41]

If it was marketed as a "sport sedan" I would completely agree, wrong wheel drive. But it isn't. It isn't a car to be driven aggressively therefore unless you're in the snow you'd never know which wheels are doing more work than the others.

[surreal1272]

Cadillac and Mercedes or BMw are not the same. The 3-series has been around 35 years, the Mercedes SL for 60 years the S-class for 50 or so years. They have consistancy of that naming convention and those products.

Cadillac had a history of word names, people don't know CT6 or XT5, they are easily forgettable. It is like when Pontiac introduced the G6, no one knew what a G6 was but they knew Grand Am. I have long said I think Cadillac is better with word names, just like I was glad to see Lincoln bring back Continental, it is just too bad it is wrong wheel drive.

Cadillac has done a good job making stand alone showrooms in recent years, I think their dealerships are fine. Maybe they aren't as large or luxurious as Lexus's but I don't think it matters.

We all know Cadillac needs crossovers badly and they have some on the way. I think they need a convertible too because convertibles are aspirational products, and a luxury brand is aspirational. This can relate to when 1/3 of CTS sales were coupes. Take away the coupe and a buyer wanting a 2 door car just goes elsewhere.

Think it all you want but dealerships do and will always matter to non blind customers.

The rest of your post doesn't even merit a response because I'm no longer taking part in your bar moving.

While SMK is trying to move the bar again, I just wanted to point out that as I was passing by the MB dealership, I posted a picture of the other day, I saw that they moved the vans right next to the entrance of the building.

Of course, because MB follows revenue above all else!

 

March 2016 ~

cla-class : DOWN 28%

c-class : DOWN 13%

e-class : DOWN 19%

s-class : DOWN 36%

 VANS :: UP 29%

 

Expect to see increasing emphasis / dealer stock on from the etherial "van division" of Daimler in the coming year as the rest of the brand is entering a sales 'slide'.

Do not forget the rebadged Nissan Truck that will show up along side the vans for sales s

A one month snap shot, E-class is on a model change over, C-class adding 2 body styles this year. They'll stabilize, but sedan sales are dropping, crossovers are rising.

The overall luxury sedan market was down like 15% last year.

And? You sure had no problem pointing out the one month snap shot of S Class sales back in December. Again, moving the damn bar.

[smk4565]

It is always better to look at a full year to really see how a car is selling.  We all look at the monthly sales report to see what is up or what is down, what is hot and what is not.  But it isn't all doom and gloom with one bad month.  S-class was up 9.7% in February.  If it is down again in April maybe they should worry a little, but the S-class outsells its next 3 or 4 competitors combined.   But if crossovers are up when sedans are down, as long as overall brand volume rises, they are fine.  BMW goes through the same thing with the 5-series and X5.  If 5-series is down 1,000 units and X5 up 1,000 units, what do they care, they got their money.

[balthazar]

Cadillac had a history of word names, people don't know CT6 or XT5, they are easily forgettable. It is like when Pontiac introduced the G6, no one knew what a G6 was but they knew Grand Am. 

So, were there thousands upon thousands of consumers scratching their heads & waving their hands in the air when "Grand Am" came out, as it was completely unknown then?

I mean, there already was a 'Trans Am' AND a 'Grand LeMans' -- IMAGINE the WIDESPREAD CONFUSION!!

 

What about 'CTS'- still think 'people don't know it'?

 

- - - - -

CT6 is just shipping to dealers now, new product names ALWAYS take some time to register at large. I would've thought that didn't need explaining...

Edited April 28, 2016 by balthazar

[William Maley]

Best news of the day is that Cadillac is planning a car based on the Cruze, that will be priced in the mid $20s with a 1.5 liter turbo and a 2.0 turbo range topper to compete with the CLA.  Everyone wants to trash the CLA, yet Cadillac seems like they need to build a competitor for it.  

 

Two things about this:

1. Cadillac has denied this rumor to Autoblog and Motor Authority. They did not say no comment, which makes me believe this is crazy talk.
2. Did we forget about the story back in January where Cadillac has said they are working on a sedan to sit below the ATS? The key thing with this story is what Dave Leone, Cadillac executive chief engineer said, "one of our strengths in sedans is that we are known for being rear-wheel drive."

Could Cadillac have thought about doing a front-wheel drive sedan? Sure, but I don't think they are. The only reason I can think why is because it saves money, which is one of the key things that got Cadillac in trouble before.

 

Sure the Mercedes-Benz CLA is a hot seller. But how many of those owners are going to buy another Mercedes? I doubt many because the CLA is a terrible car in terms of interior, power, and value for money. In the short term, it is making them money. Long term? Could be a different story.

[surreal1272]

It is always better to look at a full year to really see how a car is selling. We all look at the monthly sales report to see what is up or what is down, what is hot and what is not. But it isn't all doom and gloom with one bad month. S-class was up 9.7% in February. If it is down again in April maybe they should worry a little, but the S-class outsells its next 3 or 4 competitors combined. But if crossovers are up when sedans are down, as long as overall brand volume rises, they are fine. BMW goes through the same thing with the 5-series and X5. If 5-series is down 1,000 units and X5 up 1,000 units, what do they care, they got their money.

Grab a history book. There you will see why Cadillac changed the naming scheme and it's mainly because all of those old names were drug into the ground by half ass efforts and horrible execution to the point that everyone forgot about them. The name change was a good thing when you take those silly little Daimler blinders off and understand those basic facts.

Edited April 28, 2016 by surreal1272

[surreal1272]

It is always better to look at a full year to really see how a car is selling.  We all look at the monthly sales report to see what is up or what is down, what is hot and what is not.  But it isn't all doom and gloom with one bad month.  S-class was up 9.7% in February.  If it is down again in April maybe they should worry a little, but the S-class outsells its next 3 or 4 competitors combined.   But if crossovers are up when sedans are down, as long as overall brand volume rises, they are fine.  BMW goes through the same thing with the 5-series and X5.  If 5-series is down 1,000 units and X5 up 1,000 units, what do they care, they got their money.

Again you contradict yourself. You say here to wait a full year but had no problem emphasizing the S Class for December 2015.

Do you see the problem or are you going to continue on and act like none of that ever happened?

[smk4565]

Cadillac had a history of word names, people don't know CT6 or XT5, they are easily forgettable. It is like when Pontiac introduced the G6, no one knew what a G6 was but they knew Grand Am.

So, were there thousands upon thousands of consumers scratching their heads & waving their hands in the air when "Grand Am" came out, as it was completely unknown then?

I mean, there already was a 'Trans Am' AND a 'Grand LeMans' -- IMAGINE the WIDESPREAD CONFUSION!!

What about 'CTS'- still think 'people don't know it'?

- - - - -

CT6 is just shipping to dealers now, new product names ALWAYS take some time to register at large. I would've thought that didn't need explaining...

But they are killing the CTS name also. Any equity it may have built is about to be erased.

This is a brand with zero focus. If sales stay low you know Johan will get pressured to fix it, and the quick fixes will come with Cadillac Cruze and Cadillac Equinox models at low prices.

Their attack on the 3 and 5 series is a total failure, the ATS and CTS are selling worse than the CTS and STS did 10 years ago. While Lexus and the 3 Germans all have sales increases since then.

15 years they have been saying they will topple the Germans, still waiting....

Edited April 28, 2016 by smk4565

[ccap41]

..and Mercedes is slaughtering the equity they built through AMG as well.. Now everything is an AMG.. slap a badge on it and it's now an AMG. 

 

It sucks because my Euro car of choice is hands-down Mercedes. I love the AMG cars(former as now anything is an AMG) with their big ole V8s and their "who gives a crap about turning" characteristics of previous generations. 

[balthazar]

^ Ignored the question.

Do people know the 'CTS' name now or not?

 

How is introducing 'CT6' now any different WRT people learning what it refers to over time?

 

Did people get confused & think the mercedes 'GLC' was a rebadged mazda GLC?