Cadillac Offers Buyouts To 400 U.S. Dealers
104
Sponsored Links
General Motors Company has moved to substantially decrease the amount of Cadillac sales outlets by offering 400 of its smallest U.S. dealers a buyout. The measure, led by Cadillac president Johan de Nysschen, is the result of the prestige-luxury brand’s ongoing transformation to overhaul its image to more effectively compete with rivals in the prestige-luxury segment.
According to a Wall Street Journal report, the buyout offer extends as much as $180,000 in “transition assistance”. It is tendered to dealers that are not willing to invest in Project Pinnacle — new brand standards recently rolled out by the brand.
Cadillac currently has 925 dealers in the U.S. The 400 dealers being offered the buyout represent 43 percent of the network and usually sell less than 50 new vehicles a year. Many of these dealers have Cadillac stores in conjunction with other GM brands, such as GMC, Buick or Chevrolet.
Johan de Nysschen revealing the 2016 Cadillac CTS-V
If all dealers who have been extended the offer accept, it will cost GM and Cadillac roughly $75 million, at which point there will be 525 Cadillac dealers nationwide.
A Cadillac spokesperson stated that dealers have been working with GM and Cadillac management for several months on Project Pinnacle — a dealer/retail-level overhaul of Cadillac operations and strategy. It was suggested by Cadillac as well as by dealers participating in the creation of Project Pinnacle that dealers not wanting to participate to invest in updating their stores be extended the buyout offer.
The buyouts are optional and are available until November 21st. Dealers were informed of the offers on Friday, September 23rd.
Further Information & Resources
- Cadillac news
- Cadillac sales numbers
- GM dealer news
- Future Cadillac roadmap
Sponsored Links
Please GM, get rid of this guy ASAP. He has no idea of what Cadillac was, is and should be. All he wants to do is make them a clone of the Europeans. That is all this guy knows. He says 500,000 sales by 2020, but sales are declining or barely increasing month after month. He introduced a stupid naming system. He basically said he doesn’t care about present Cadillac customers. The XTS was supposed to be discontinued, now it is being updated. He moved the headquarters to New York and seems to be more interested in coffee shops and fashion than in product and sales. He is the wrong person to be leading the Cadillac rebirth.
What are you proposing that’s any better? Cadillac must be seen as a status symbol by everyone, and not as a retirement gift as it’s seen now.
This was never about America vs. Germany vs. Japan. There is no ‘American luxury’ just as there is no ‘German luxury’ or ‘Japanese luxury’. There is only luxury as a expression of wealth, status, technological might, and excess; the kinds of ego stroking that people get when they opt to spend more money on things that make them feel great, like they’re on the cutting edge of the future. That is what Cadillac was founded on, and in turn, what every luxury automaker does in the products the offer .
When you’re selling something as being better than an ordinary product, when it’s promoted as a status symbol, then you cannot rely having that image spoiled or ruined by it’s presentation.
How many times have you been on a Cadillac lot and seen and heard those silvery tassels stung up between two lampposts blowing in the wind? How about a giant inflatable gorilla on the roof of the dealership? Does that sound befitting of car that is suppose to be a luxury product and a status symbol, or does it sound like you’re on a used car lot in a rough part of town? Cadillac should never be associated with this kind of cheap and low-quality promotion. It’s crap like that that can destroy Cadillacs’ image as a desirable luxury product? Stuff like that is a massive turn off, and dealers who can’t understand this need to get the chop.
Mercedes, BMW, and Lexus seem to know what it means to tailor the message about status when it comes to promoting themselves. It will work for Cadillac, but it will not work for Cadillac if the dealers don’t understand how important it is to present Cadillac as something distinct and better than a Mercedes, BMW, or Lexus. The luxury consumer wants to be treated different and feel like they’re on the cutting edge; like they have the best. A tiled customer lounge with plastic chairs, a Keurig, and 24-hour TV news isn’t good enough for these people, and it shouldn’t be good enough for Cadillac’s people.
Bemoan all you like about the NY office, fashion shows, coffee shops, and 3 minute artistic ad copy on Youtube. You’re not trying to market your cars to retirees. Luxury knows no age limit, and anyone can ‘arrive’ at any age. Retirement is not an acceptable reason to buy a Cadillac.
This whole project is about image and status, something that Cadillac has let wither for 60 years with cars that were low-cost substitutes for image. It has to change, and dealers can no longer be allowed to be a barrier to the promotion of this image. Despite what you think about it, de Nysschen has been doing more to present Cadillac as a status symbol than the original CTS did, and I very much doubt that making substandard badge-jobs promoting a $30K undercut of the competition would ever allow Cadillac to rise to the level that the mainstream luxury automakers enjoy.
~
TL;DR: Cutting edge status is more important than promoting a luxury car as a retirement gift. Tassels and inflatable dinosaurs don’t sell luxury cars. Fashion shows and expensive coffee are a fact of life for luxury consumers. Ego stroking makes people spend more on expensive products. Dealers who don’t understand don’t deserve to sell Cadillacs.
Grawdaddy wrote: “This was never about America vs. Germany vs. Japan. There is no ‘American luxury’ just as there is no ‘German luxury’ or ‘Japanese luxury’.
I couldn’t disagree more. There is a long history of distinct differences between American, German, and Japanese approaches to cars. And that extends just as fully – perhaps even more so – to each definition of luxury cars. The problem is that Cadillac has virtually given up on American luxury in pursuit of the German definition of luxury.
What are the differences and why? It starts with the road conditions and distances typically travelled, along with culture and physiology. Traditionally, Americans have favored larger cars than Europeans or Japanese, with more powerful engines than Japanese, and much softer rides than Germans, somewhat softer than Japanese. Germans put a premium on the ability to drive a car like a sports car (tight turns with virtually no lean, jackrabbit starts, oversized brakes, etc. – everything meant to weave through traffic and “win” in your own mind, some imaginary race). Germans put far less emphasis on comfort over long trips and agonizing commutes. And that makes some sense, because America is much bigger, with people making longer drives in general, on wider roads, though lacking the purity of the Autobahn. Japanese on the other hand have had generally smaller sized people favoring smaller sized cars, tend to make shorter trips, and rarely can use the power of a large engine, so their luxury cars have been designed as such.
Germans have also traditionally put a fetishist premium on so-called “fit and finish”, giving great concern to the type of stitching used on the seats, the click feeling of the buttons, the quality of the woodgrain, the way the interior lighting slowly dims rather than simply turning off, the quality and appearance of the carpeting in the trunk, etc. They even care about the sound of the engine, not wanting it as quiet as possible but exhibiting a certain “tone”. Those things further define “German luxury”, while Americans didn’t care much about them, as long as they had their roominess, their high HP and torque, a nice comfortable ride, and a few high tech gadgets to keep them entertained or make the driving experience easier. American luxury buyers did not care about how many gears the car shifted with, as long as it was a smooth ride, and they certainly didn’t care about the ability to override to manual shift. Bottom line is that American luxury is nice and relaxed, while German luxury is about imagining you are a sports car driver, busily shifting, darting, weaving, and aggressively “winning” in your own mind. The American luxury driver has already “won”, simply by owning his American luxury car – if it’s a true Cadillac, not a badge-engineered Cimarron or euro-wannabe.
Japanese luxury emphasizes reliability over that of American and German brands, something that both can take a lesson from, but rarely do. It took a long time though for Japanese cars to rise from undersized, undepowered, and overly plastic interiors, and to some extent those still aren’t priorities on Japanese cars. Though that makes sense given that Japan is very crowded, and people are accustomed to being in cramped areas and forced to move slowly.
In the recent past I gave Toyota some credit, for often imitating American rather than German luxury, in their mid and large cars and in their Lexus brand – as a way of attracting American buyers. For many years Toyota didn’t care that their cars were called “boring” (in terms of driving dynamics) by the Euro-loving professional auto writers (who favored driving as an aggressive exercise, rather than a means of transportation), they were happy to sell tons of Camrys, Avalons, Lexuses with the generally soft rides that auto-writers hate. Unfortunately that has changed in recent years, appeasing auto writers somewhat but also hurting sales (and the bodies of the riders).
Bottom line then:
German Luxury: over-engineered (and often needing repalrs), hard-riding race-car dynamics, fetishist attention to interior details others don’t care about, high prices as a result. I suppose I could also add high prices, as some people see their German cars as “you can’t buy this” status symbols, to show off (lord over) their neighbors.
Japanese Luxury: reliability, ride quality appropriate for short distances but not long trips, some approximation between American and German concepts of luxury.
American Luxury: Large, roomy (including the back seat), well-cushioned and quiet ride, plenty of power.
Graw, it is strange to me that you can deride traditional Cadillac rides as “sofas on wheels” but then say there is no difference between American luxury and German luxury. It seems to me that you merely accept German luxury as the only concept of luxury, and thus you applaud Cadillac for throwing in the towel on American luxury and embracing the German concept of luxury. Frankly I’d like to see a move back toward “sofas on wheels”, what is wrong with having a nice ride when you are going from here to there, and you don’t fancy yourself as a NASCAR driver or fetishist about the quality of carpeting in the trunk?
Correction/clarification to above. I meant to write that the high prices of German cars could be seen as a “luxury feature”, since some people (especially Americans who insist on buying German luxury cars) as “status symbols” to reflect their alleged wealth, rather than their personal taste in features.
Buying imported luxury cars is a huge waste of money just for imagery! I have bought American produced cars for over 40 years, I had up to three cars at a time. And I save tens of thousands of dollars in purchases, servicing, and maintenance. Only true fools fall for “import is better” lies, and their money is gone quickly!
Some people live outside of the Continental USA. Some even live where no cars are built and so where “all” are imported.
I’ve owned many (currently own Ford, Chevy, Volvo and Jaguar) and while American vehicles tend to have very good engines so too do others.
Difference is American cars are wanting in area of quality materials (interior especially) and also below compitition in area of fit and finish.
Thankfully these issues seem to be changing with some but it’s going to take sustained efforts and time.
Question is will American Auto makers look to the long term? Historically the answer has been negative.
Calling people fools is a little harsh. If you have earned the ability to buy a luxury vehicle then you hardly foolish.
No. Imported cars, at least in this market segment, are better overall than American cars. Period.
The Americans are better at some things. The ATS handles better than the 3-Series, for example, and the CTS might actually be better than the 5-Series and A6, but the new E-Class wallops it (and everyone else).
The Americans make nothing like an S-Class, or a 7-Series. Let alone a Rolls-Royce or Bentley. They used to, but not today.
The S-Class is smooth and quiet and relaxed, and while there’s body roll as a trade off, it doesn’t wallow. Nobody wants a car that wallows. That’s the “relaxed ride” people think of when they think of “classic American”. Germans proved you can be as smooth and quiet without the wallow.
We haven’t even touched interior quality yet. Cadillac can make a vehicle like this, or better, but their people just don’t understand luxury enough to do it. Johann is trying to change that.
Wow Drew, how did you come to that conclusion,”Status symbols”, “alleged wealth”, for german cars. I just finished my research on buying something, took about 6 months before i decided on what i want. Have always been a GM person, own a 2010 Enclave with 68K on it. Was gonna trade it in on a new and was insulted for what they offered me. Tried cadilac dealer and his first words to me” how much can i afford”. Something must have changed. I just ordered my 2017 Audi Q7. Guess i am a status symbol, and built and has the safety tech that american companies haven’t thought of yet. I have no alleged wealth, but do have a taste in features Maybe you should look at them or you a impulse buyer?
Too bad you had that experience at the Cadillac dealership. It is those prehistoric dealerships that hopefully Project Pinacle will weed out.
If you are a dealership that does not have the wherewithal to sell more than 50 units per year then you should not be in business. If a sales team does know how to properly sell to their potential clientele then they do not deserve the sale.
John G, if you have read my other comments on this topic, you’d see that I don’t personally care about “status symbols” or “showing off”. I like what I like and I don’t care if other people think I am cool or successful based on what I apparently own. But the case has been made here that some people view luxury cars as a way to show off to others, and I am not going to disagree that this is true, to some extent, for some people. What else could explain the Rolex phenomenon?
“Graw, it is strange to me that you can deride traditional Cadillac rides as “sofas on wheels” but then say there is no difference between American luxury and German luxury. It seems to me that you merely accept German luxury as the only concept of luxury, and thus you applaud Cadillac for throwing in the towel on American luxury and embracing the German concept of luxury. Frankly I’d like to see a move back toward “sofas on wheels”, what is wrong with having a nice ride when you are going from here to there, and you don’t fancy yourself as a NASCAR driver or fetishist about the quality of carpeting in the trunk?”
Here’s another way of looking at my understanding of why luxury cars aren’t tied down to national identities:
I’m Canadian, and we don’t have a domestic luxury automaker to call our own. Therefore, a luxury car is any car that would excel beyond that of a common car by providing an experience beyond that of the ordinary. The very definition of luxury is just that:
“a material object, service, etc., conducive to sumptuous living, usually a delicacy, elegance, or refinement of living rather than a necessity”
-source: http://www.dictionary.com/browse/luxury
Notice how it says “rather than a necessity”. That alone undoes all your tripe about how the Japanese live in small country with a lot of people and therefore have no need to drive fast, or how American luxury cars are made for long highway drives, or how German cars are all hard riding Autobahn racers. I can easily find example from all 3 that would counter your short-sighted nationalistic impressions about what you expect from luxury cars.
In fact, lets do it just to show you how wrong you are:
Reliable American luxury – Escalade
Hard riding American luxury – CTS-V
Comfortable American luxury – XTS
Reliable German luxury – E-class
Hard riding German luxury – M5
Comfortable German luxury – S-class
Reliable Japanese luxury – ES
Hard riding Japanese luxury – IS-F
Comfortable Japanese luxury – LS
See what happens when you go into this with preconceived ideas of what to expect from each country? Your understanding comes out mangled by cars like the S-class; a car that has pillow soft smooth road manners, or the IS-F which promotes its ‘unjapanese-like’ performance, or the reliability of an LS-powered Escalade.
What does this have to do with being Canadian? It means that if I’m in the market for a reliable luxury car, a hard riding luxury car, or a comfortable luxury car, then I can sift through the offerings available and not get hung up on the idea that one country does one attribute better than another. I’m not saying other people can’t do it either, but ‘country of origin’ does little to persuade me anymore than seeing a ‘country of origin’ label on a can of stew.
That can beef stew may say ‘Product of USA’, but my impulse says “I want beef stew tonight!” and I grab the can. I’m not going to stop and say “I want to look for a can of Canadian beef stew because it’s full of Canadian-ness” because that doesn’t happen when people buy luxury products.
The products need to become objects of desire. It’s doesn’t matter if it’s can of beef stew or an $80K CT6. People have to lust for it with price or country of origin being no barrier.
For the luxury consumer, it means not going in with unrealistic expectations, because it’s entirely possible that I could find that the soft-riding nature I would except of the XTS could be outdone by the S-class, or the aggressive road manners of the M5 could be outdone by the IS-F. Luxury autos can’t be compartmentalized like that, and when you do, you’re putting blinders on yourself deliberately for no damn good reason. Luxury shoppers aren’t going to limit themselves like that, because even they like having choice.
Nothing you think of when it comes to luxury cars from other nations matters. What matter is that little part of your ego that makes you feel like you’re getting access to the best damn car on Earth. It’s the same part of your brain that makes you feel like the new phone you bought is better than the slow junk your co-workers or neighbours have; that you have the means to go that little bit further and get something that much better than what they have.
You call it as someone who would “lord over” their neighbors, but it’s that little bit of satisfaction that that drive the ENTIRE luxury consumer product industry, not just the cars. It’s what makes people buy the luxury product because they aren’t getting something ordinary like what their neighbours have.
Anything to make the buyer feel extra special; when their impulse says “I want it now”. It’s every luxury product makers dream is to hear that call, and respond immediately. It’s Cadillac mandate to make cars that stir deep feelings of desire and demand.
You see how feverish people get around new iPhones? That is the kind of impulse that luxury products can do to people, and it has nothing to do with it being American. If that were true, then the Motorolla Razr would be held aloft as such a great phone because it too is American.
In my opinion, the iPhone isn’t particularly amazing and I see it more a toy for those who like celebrity gossip. There are more exclusive, more capable, and better phones available, but none get quite as much press as the iPhone. As such, presenting a phone as being a luxury object can throw away all that ‘country of origin’ talk as the product is seen as a status symbol.
Cadillac could benefit from the same kind of status symbol presentation, and it would appeal to everyone on earth, not just Americans.
Preach brother!!!
Graw, perhaps your being Canadian does explain your lack of awareness of American, German, and Japanese traditional markets. Or perhaps you are fairly young, and/or only recently became interested in cars. I am in my 50’s now, but I have appreciated the traditional Cadillac ride, roominess, appearance, technology since I was a teenager (my family never owned them, but friends did). What is derided today about the traditional ride was so cool to me then, that I felt like I was in my living room, with soft roomy seat, isolated ride, great stereo, etc. The only thing that would have made it even better would have been a sunroof or open convertible top.
You may think that all countries have had the same driving preferences and styles, but that simply isn’t true. Only in recent years have auto writers been able to push brainwashed American consumers to harder and harder riding “euro style” cars. Look at the wheel sizes alone, with the ridiculous low-profile tires that yield a jarring ride in pursuit of ever-more euro-style handling. That’s an effect of auto-writers and a very small percentage of “enthusiasts”, but it’s also somehow a feeling that “if the Germans are doing it, it must be better”. I simply disagree with that mindset, but you are either feigning ignorance or genuinely ignorant if you don’t know the traditional differences among the top 3 auto nations.
Even in terms of appearance, there has been a difference between American styling and German styling. American cars from the 1960’s onward favored clean straight lines on their higher end cars, while European (especially German) ones favored rounding everything. Eventually the snooty, Euro-loving auto-writers derided American cars as “boxy” looking, and many among the brainwashed public responded with “yeah, I guess I don’t want that”. So Euro-styling is the way JdN wants to take Cadillac, even though Mark Reuss opposes him, on at least that one aspect of the cars. But to pretend you don’t see any difference among the cars of the top 3 nations, traditionally? As I’ve said, a lot of this, maybe all of it, can be explained by each nation finding what best fits their own geography and culture. Nothing wrong with that. But it also means that Cadillac should be trying to emphasize what is best about American style luxury, rather than running away from it and pretending they’ve been wrong all along, that Euro-sports “luxury” is really best, and Cadillac will bow its head and do what it can to be a follower of Euro-style and Euro-driving mechanics, rather than the leader of American preferences that it has always been.
As far as your attempt to cherry-pick a car from each nation and claim it “puts a lie to the idea of a style/preference inherent to each”, that’s just silly. Someone could point to the Corvette Stingray of any era from the 1960’s onward as an example of an American car that favors curved lines and sporty handling over a cushioned ride. But it didn’t represent American luxury in general, nor was it remotely affordable for most, although I suppose it could be viewed somewhat as a budget Ferrari or Porsche. As to the Mercedes S-class, that’s about the only soft-riding German luxury car you can find. And it’s hugely expensive – we’re talking well over $100k for a reasonably equipped S-class model. What about everyone who is not ultra-rich? Are they supposed to be stuck with hard rides forever? The S-class now is what the Stingray was then, a rare, very expensive exception to the rule, not an example that proves the rule never existed.
And regarding the XTS, that’s not really an American style car anymore. It’s supposed to be a nod to older Americans who want FWD and a cushioned ride. Sure it’s softer riding than other current Cadillac models, but it fails to be remotely a true Cadillac ride. The DTS was the last real Cadillac, IMO, and even that had moved toward a stiffer ride than prior luxury American cars. The XTS also fails in terms of having the unnecessarily gadgety (and frankly cheap, when costs are figured) CUE system, but that is somewhat outside the bounds of this discussion. Bottom line is that the XTS fails to be a genuine American car (too much curving of the lines as well), even if it in riding dynamics is closer to the American ride than others in the Cadillac sedan line-up.
What you are failing to recognize – and frankly I’m amazed that anyone with an interest in cars would miss this – is that there IS a difference traditionally between aims of the big 3 auto makers, and that also we’ve been pushed more and more toward the German type of cars, hard riding and supposedly “better handling”, along with curves rather than straight lines. You can have your own preference, but you can’t have your own history.
And as far as bringing Apple into the equation, true there is no particular “American style” of smart phones. That doesn’t mean that there is no tradition of American cars. By the way, if you are a hockey fan as I am (I grew up in the US Midwest, playing hockey and appreciating American cars from the Midwest), perhaps you will note that there has been a traditional difference between North American hockey and European hockey. NA hockey is more hard-hitting, Euro hockey is more about skating and finesse, even though there are elements of both in either game. Why? Probably a combination of rink size (larger in Europe) and tradition. But don’t try to tell me that there hasn’t been a historical difference between the two hockey styles, any more than trying to tell me that there isn’t such a thing as differences between American, German, and Japanese cars.
To go a little further with the hockey analogy – Patrick Kane is almost certainly the best “speed and finesse” Euro-style player in the NHL today. And it just so happens he is a product of North American hockey, not European hockey. Patrick Kane is the Mercedes S-Class of the NHL, a high priced option that goes against the overall perception of the league. But that doesn’t mean that North American hockey is more speed and finesse oriented than Euro-hockey, or even equally so. What say you Graw, regarding your national sport?
Well explained breakdown of what we could call regional fetishism.
Less dealers does not automatically translate into higher sales and the notion is, frankly, counterintuitive.
Cadillac already provides a great product as well as customer experience on par with Japanese luxury brands yet we see stronger growth over at Lincoln. I do not want to see Cadillac destroy it’s “home field”advantage.
Furthermore, many Americans don’t see European-style coffee shops and art galleries sexy. Cadillac must capture the American luxury imagination. Partnerships with Bloomingdale and Tiffany’s–brash consumerism might help.
Many are missing the point of the article and Project Pinnacle.
These 400 dealerships are being ‘offered’ a buyout if they do not want to participate in the program highlighted by investing in updating their dealerships.
Less dealerships does not necessarily translate to higher sales but improving the dealer experience when it comes to facility upgrades and better services offered to the clients certainly will.
Mercedes has less than 925 dealers in the US but sell over 2x as many vehicles as Cadillac.
As far as Euro-style coffee shops and art galleries, there are many potential clients of Cadillac that do see those things as ‘sexy’.
The Cadillac Elmiraj, Ciel and Cadillac Sixteen are all examples of what Cadillac should be, a big, brash, in your face car. The Escala looks like a European wannabe. There is a reason why the Escalade is such a success. It’s what a Cadillac should be. I currently own a Cadillac, and my dealer treats me fantastic. Sure, it’s nice to be treated great, but I also want to be treated by a real person. Not some trendy individual whose style will be old news next week. In case you don’t know it, the people who you are describing are just flavor of the day people. BMW. Then Mercedes. Now Tesla. What’s next. Give me a steady customer base. Not the flavor of the day crowd. That is not a recipe for long term success. Why do you think that BMW, Mercedes and Audi are moving downscale? It’s for long term success.
The Cadillac Elmiraj, Ciel and Cadillac Sixteen are all examples of what Cadillac should be, a big, brash, in your face car. The Escala looks like a European wannabe. There is a reason why the Escalade is such a success. It’s what a Cadillac should be. I currently own a Cadillac, and my dealer treats me fantastic. Sure, it’s nice to be treated great, but I also want to be treated by a real person. Not some trendy individual whose style will be old news next week. In case you don’t know it, the people who you are describing are just flavor of the day people. BMW. Then Mercedes. Now Tesla. What’s next. Give me a steady customer base. Not the flavor of the day crowd. That is not a recipe for long term success. Why do you think that BMW, Mercedes and Audi are moving downscale? It’s for long term success.
Well those flavour of the day customers are buying about a million BMW, Mercedes, Audi and Lexus vehicle each year. Tesla volumes are inconsequential right now.
BMW, Mercedes, Audi, etc. have no option but to move downmarket because they no alternative brands to capture the low end of the luxury market. GM has Buick for that.
And Korean automakers are continuing to make huge strides also.
Gerry, I agree with you except regarding the XTS. Extending its life was Johan’s best decision thus far. The XTS is the closest thing Cadillac has to a classic American luxury car, even though the DTS was a lot better and should have been continued (with updating).
I think the bigger problem is that people above JdN made the decision to make Cadillac a BMW wanna-be, and de Nysschen was simply brought in to execute that plan. Same for other non-Americans in top positions such as Uwe Ellinghaus and Andrew Smith. So blame GM management for turning its back on America, and thinking that there were more sales to be gained as a third rate Euro-sports imitator, than a first rate American luxury brand.
The move to close nearly half the dealerships as a way to “enhance the brand” shows again that they don’t want Cadillac associated with American/Midwest cars, since the dealers to be closed would be those with other US car brands, rather than stand-alones (or those combined only with other very expensive, non-American brands). There was a time when GM had a goal of car buyers starting out with Chevrolet, moving up to Pontiac or Oldsmobile, then Buick, then Cadillac, each as they became more affluent. Cadillac was to be the aspiration for all GM brands. Obviously that day is gone, and it probably never made a lot of sense in the first place, as people would rarely stick with just one corporation for their cars (though some apparently do).
They say that Reuss of GM has been disagreeing with JdN on Cadillac designs, as Reuss prefers the edgy, bold straight lines (that reflect back to at least the 1967 Eldorado) that say “Cadillac” to a lot of people, while Johan favors round, curving, flowing lines like the Euro-cars. I’m not sure if Reuss has any other objections as far as keeping Cadillac an American company rooted in the Midwest (not Manhattan), but if he’s clashing with JdN it appears he is losing. So blame someone higher up, such as Barra, for that.
GM knew what they were getting when they hired a South African formerly of Audi and Infinity to head Cadillac, as well as a German formerly from BMW (and Mountblanc) to head Cadillac’s marketing, and an Australian to head the design. Despite what they might say, seems a decision was made to abandon 100+ years of history as an American luxury icon and become a Euro-sports wannabe. From what I can tell, JdN is simply the executor of that decision, and someone above him needs to be replaced for the decision itself to change.
I actually think they should have gotten rid of the XTS. Speaking from a young person’s mindset, and thus the mindset of future potential customers, the XTS is a grandpa-mobile.
The FWD proportions look stubby and unsophisticated. It’s true, most people will never need the performance advantages of RWD, but that setup gives a better more premium look and appeal, and speaks to an overall worldliness in capabilities.
Overall, I think it’s priced fairly, but it’s just too cheap to be a “flagship”, hence the CT6. It’s a weird outlier in the Cadillac lineup, designed to keep the retirement home crowd happy until they all die off.
Well the XTS is produced for actual rather than POTETIAL customers! Actually pay the bills!
If Cadillac only produces for potential customers, they will flop!
Martin, exactly right. GM is in business to make a profit, and selling a lot of cars like the XTS – and DTS and Deville before it – made profit for the brand. NewQ wants Cadillac to only cater to customers like herself, rich young snobs who won’t deign to talk to a dealer if they also sell Chevys and Cadillacs. The reality is that there aren’t enough customers like NewQ, the 20-something, self-absorbed, “urban hip”, latte drinking, ultra-rich. NewQ derides places like Iowa and Flint (Michigan), but if Cadillac focuses on a tiny segment of rich kids that live in Manhattan and Palo Alto, then they’ll be making only cars for theoretical buyers who don’t exist in large numbers.
Further, Manhattanites are likely to not even own a car (taking cabs and Uber), and the Palo Alto dot-com millionaires are likely to want Teslas. NewQ doesn’t want middle aged and retired middle and upper-middle class Americans driving HER Cadillacs, she wants the brand exclusive to people only like herself. Hence she wants Cadillac to drop all the dealerships that aren’t exclusive to people like herself, and drop all the Cadillac models that she personally wouldn’t buy.
I should have rephrased. The XTS ONLY makes sense as a way to appease Cadillac’s existing customers.
Given that, I think they did a fine job with it. It looks like an old man car, but not an OLD MAN CAR, like the old DTS or something with wire wheels and a landau top. It’s okay, and it serves a specific market segment.
But, it does NOT have a place in Cadillac’s future. It’s something for older customers (which you can rightfully call “actual” customers) to buy while Cadillac rolls out new products to try and attract new customers (which you can rightfully call “potential” customers).
But, these potential customers will almost never become actual customers, so long as today’s actual customers remain Cadillac’s actual customers. That’s why the XTS is in a weird spot. It’s the last vestige of the bad old days of floaty old man boats in a sea of new mostly world-class models. It’s prettied up well enough that it doesn’t look like someone drove to the wrong place for the 5 PM early bird dinner special, but you can tell it’s not the brand’s future.
It’s in this weird in-between world, and I’m really not sure what the best course of action should be for it. It brings in sales (which Cadillac needs), but it prevents the brand from fully growing in to the future. If I were in charge, I would have made the hard choice and cut it, but I can understand why they kept it around.
NewQ, you are a victim of marketing if you buy into the concept that the XTS is “an old man’s car” or that a plush ride only appeals to older people. American cars used to have great rides, and that was across the board, not just Cadillacs – although Cadillacs did have the best ride (aka “the Cadillac ride”).
You’ve obviously just been reading literature from strangely biased auto-writers about the “bad old days” of “floaty old man boats”. Clearly you’ve never driven or ridden in any of them, you’ve obviously never even ridden in the much more recent (and firmer than classic Cadillacs of the past) DTS, which you claim “wallows”, based on no personal experience of your own.
Under normal driving conditions for 85% of people, a plush ride like the old Cadillacs is superior. For long commutes and highway driving, you can’t beat it. That’s not for “old men”, that’s for everyone, especially those who actually have to drive long distances for work, unlike you apparently.
The problem though is that professional auto-writers like to “push” their cars in unrealistic driving conditions, resembling NASCAR racing. And a few immature idiots will likewise try to dart in and out of traffic, imagining that the “athletic” nature of their car compensates for the athletic physique and skills they never had. But that’s not how most people drive, including most how buy into the lie that the past American cars were like being at sea – a term the professional auto-writers like to use, but something that was never true.
The professional auto-writers have tried to push car-makers to build cars that THEY like (for NASCAR type of driving), and they’ve generally succeeded via their biased writing. But it’s time for people to actually experience driving for themselves, rather than reading about it from others and then assuming those were accurate depictions rather than hyperbole and bias. And time for people to buy cars that they want themselves, based on their own judgment, rather than buying what they are told to buy – i.e. you are of a certain age and demographic, therefore you must want this type of car and not that type of car.
Gerry — your comment is full of misconceptions, FUD and negative gossip with very little support of what is stated. I’ll attempt to address them here but I suspect they won’t change your opinion much.
1. Cadillac’s move to New York was already in motion before JDN’s arrival. This was necessary to give the brand division-like status within GM, much like Audi is within VW.
2. The change in Cadillac’s nomenclature was also in motion before JDN’s arrival. The change isn’t “stupid” but rather a necessity (the ability to clearly build a hierarchy in the lineup).
You can find more facts (not conjecture) regarding both of these items here:
http://gmauthority.com/blog/2014/12/cadillacs-de-nysschen-isnt-behind-all-these-big-decisions-exclusive/
3. Then you say: “He basically said he doesn’t care about present Cadillac customers”. How did he “basically say” this? Short answer: he did not.
4. The move to keep the XTS is a good one, as it will maintain sales volumes from that vehicle and keep that model’s customers in the Cadillac family. Then, new models (especially those in new segments) will deliver more sales volume and customers.
5. One does not need to focus much on knowing “what Cadillac was”, as past sales are in the past, and the automotive luxury space has been transformed since Cadillac’s prime. Instead, one must have a clear-cut vision of what Cadillac needs to be in the future, with a good understanding of what it currently is. I believe the proverb is, “learn from history, but don’t dwell on it”.
So, contrary to your recommendations, there is no need to “get rid” of JDN since he knows exactly what he is doing; in fact, he is already doing. He knows exactly what it takes to take a decent yet damaged brand and make it great and highly successful, as that’s what he has done at Audi. It’s not an easy task that takes plenty of courage of conviction, especially with armchair CEOs like yourself.
The most ill-advised part of your comment is that “All he wants to do is make them a clone of the Europeans. That is all this guy knows.”
How do you know what JDN knows, and “what he wants to do”? And even if Cadillac is to become a clone of the European brands (not saying that it will), then it’s better than what has been taking place with the brand for the last 30 years.
I’m all for an educated, healthy discussion about this topic, but in this case, it appears that an overwhelming amount of preconceived notions on your part are hindering logic, good thought, and ultimately — healthy or educated discourse.
Saw the buyout offer coming – and offer will likely have to be increased as Dealers are unlikely to accept that paltry sum.
As for Cadillac/GM: I’ll stay with my Euro and Japanese cars for the luxury, quality and performance (which to me means more than just 0 to 60 time).
Cadillac: according to GM is marketing itself as “the standard of the world” and yet can’t build a flagship Coupe (2 or 4 door with or without hatch) or Convertible? And Escalade with no IRS?
Not really a ‘paltry sum’ to dealers selling less than 50 units per year while having to maintain a Cadillac franchise.
This will be a life raft for them .
As far as not building a flagship coupe or convertible, incase you are not aware those cars do not sell very much.
Not sure who wouldn’t know coupes and convertibles sell less than SUV’s or even sedans? Though Cadillac’s Euro and Japanes competitors are doing so…because they sell many of the aforementioned.
If Cadillac wants to be “the standard of the world” then it’s going to need to offer what the global buyers want.
Or maybe change that slogan?
Sure they sell high end coupes but very very few in comparison to sedans and convertibles.
FYI…You should actually look into how that slogan ‘the standard of the world’ came into being. It was referring to standardized parts and not to the finished products.
What “should” occur is; Cadillac should not make ingenuous claims! It drives away discernible customers.
i really hope Cadillac continues to make improvements – the evident focus on quality of new XT5 and CT6 give reason for optimism.
Hopefully the profits from these and Escalade will result in a flagship sedan and coupe (and convertible – like MB) in not too distant future.
Also good to see that Cadillac is actually offering “buyout” to Dealers instead of “starving” or legally fighting it’s Dealers as some commentators suggested a few months ago.
That itself shows a degree of ethical business decision making!
Hardly disingenuous rather it is a slogan and aspirational.
So far sales say otherwise
How are reduced sales and the ‘Standard’ slogan linked?
Mr. De Nysschen is sadly misguided, He is spending a fortune trying to change Cadillac’s image because he thinks that’s what is needed to sell more cars. Cars sell for two reasons 1) its a good product offered at a good price, which makes it a good “VALUE”. 2) if you have a good product, which Cadillac does, and it is offered at a reasonable price, which Cadillac is doing since Mr. De Nysschen’s premium pricing strategy proved to be a miserable failure you need to tell the consumers, which Cadillac DOES NOT DO. The Dare Greatly Campaign is a FAILURE !!! Mr De Nysschen should review the Mercedes Ad Campaign. It demonstrates the car’s capability…it provides a reason to consider purchasing and it provides a reason to aspire to own one. Cadillac’s Dare Greatly Campaign doesn’t do any of that and that’s why sales are dropping like a stone, I hope Mr. De Nysschen figures this out before he destroys the brand.
FrankR, exactly right. Cadillacs which have been priced as aspirational for upper-middle class and even for hard-working middle class American semi-retirees, have always sold well. De Nysschen seems to want to imitate the German trick of pricing cars so high that Americans will want to own them in part because the price is high – they can show off their supposed German luxury to their neighbors (as if the neighbors actually care). But there’s little point in raising Cadillacs to near-Ferrari prices, unless the brand wants to also accept Ferrari-like sales numbers (if that).
The fact is that the people who want German status symbols are always going to want German badged cars. Pretending to be a Manhattan based brand and raising prices through the roof is not going to change the perception that some people have. Which is fine, since Cadillac has always represented the best in American-defined luxury, and if it’s remotely affordable for hard-working, long-term savers – then what is wrong with that? But I don’t expect a South African from Audi and Infiniti (de Nysschen) to understand what Cadillac means as a brand to Americans.
FrankR..you couldn’t be more wrong.
Your 2 reasons why cars sell may works for selling Chevrolet, Honda, Hyundai, etc. but not for luxury brands.
Luxury buyers are as much about image as substance. Luxury anything is not about need but desire.
A $100 Timex watch can tell time just as well as a Blvgari but shoppers in the 1% are not going looking to impress their friends with a Timex.
Cadillac also has to work on image and that is where coffee shops, fashion shows, etc. come into play.
There is nothing wrong with Cadillac being a destination for long term savers but the problem has been that those long term savers are no longer seeing Cadillac as a way to show their success. That mantle has been taken over buy Mercedes, BMW, Audi, Lexus, Jaguar, etc.
None of those have American luxury features but they are being snapped by Americans by the tens of thousands each month.
Jamdown, if luxury is strongly about “image” – i.e. showing off for others – then how does Cadillac cultivate this image other than offering great cars for the money? It’s a fine line between showing off “I am rich” and “I am a sucker”. To my thinking, anyone who buys a Rolex watch and flashes it around is saying “I am a sucker who thinks I’ll impress people by wasting my money”, or “I have major self esteem issues”, or “I think other people are so shallow that they will be impressed by my wasting all this money on a stupid watch that is no better than a Timex”.
A good test of “luxury” would be to ask the question – “Would you own this if no one else would ever know you owned it?”. Personally I’ve never owned a car to impress others, with the exception that I don’t want a cramped piece of junk that looks ridiculous. But I could be just as happy in terms of my need to impress others, with a new-ish, well-maintained Ford Taurus as a Bentley Continental. I could easily afford a Rolex, I could even afford the Bentley – but I don’t want it. I can’t think of a single person who has impressed me in life with what they own, in terms of a car or watch. And if someone has a lot of money, I think “ok he’s got a lot of money”. It doesn’t make me want to be his friend any more or less, due to the money.
Now maybe some shallow women would be impressed with a guy flashing his money via his overly expensive watch and car, but to me that guy is a loser because he’s trying to compensate for what he’s lacking. And a lot of other people – including the women he’s desperately trying to impress – would read it the same way. So what Cadillac should do is create cars that don’t shout “I am a sucker with self-esteem issues”, but would present the owner with a kind of self-assured, quiet cool. And give the owner value for the high price, even if no one else knows he owns it. Now if you can create an insanely overpriced “image” like Rolex, great – you’ll make huge gross margins, but I don’t know how you create that “excessively overpriced” image without it potentially backfiring in a major way.
I think Lincoln is doing the right things with their marketing now. They have Matthew McConaughey, a guy with the looks and “cool” that a lot of other guys would like to have. They show him at an obviously expensive but not hugely flashy house (wearing nice suit, falling back into his outdoor pool at night). They show him in nightclubs. They show him driving his Lincolns. And the best part – he says he drives Lincolns just because he likes them, not to impress others. Lincoln thus is having it both ways, they are saying that Lincolns are for people so cool that they don’t need status symbols, yet they are at the same time offering a status symbol that will (hopefully) make people identify you as someone like Matthew McConaughey.
I’ve always preferred Cadillacs to Lincolns, but the way things are going I could see shifting over to Lincoln, if trends continue and JDN has his way. The new Continental – in terms of driving mechanics, seating comfort, etc. – could be more to my liking than any current Cadillac sedan (I don’t know, haven’t tried it), although the exterior styling is boring and derivative. The recent Lincolns I’ve driven have been close, but not quite there in terms of room, seat comfort, and driving mechanics refinement. But they are getting closer. Though all the Lincolns I’ve heard with the THX Ultra II stereo sound awesome. I just hope Lincoln will fill eventually the role of the old Cadillac, if Cadillac doesn’t want it. Of course I’d like even more Cadillac to be Cadillac, but it looks like JDN and company are taking it a different way, as a “brand new” Euro-clone, instead of an American company with over 100 years of proud history. Too bad about that.
Your interpretation of luxury or how you spend your money is personal to you. You do not speak for everyone. There are some buyers that do want to show their success by what they can buy. If they are that successful then they have that right and should not be derided by people like you calling them ‘suckers’. No different than your claim of being able to buy a Bentley. Whether you do or do not is up to you just like the potential for you to switch to Lincoln is up to you.
Cadillac is rebuilding it’s image with product and also appealing to some buyers who would not normally consider them by going to places where those potential clients frequent like high end coffee shop, art galleries, fashion shows, etc.
Lincolns approach is only one of many ways to reach desired customers. I personally do not think it is that effective. I personally do not like Matthew McConaughey as an actor and I do not know him personally so it would do nothing for me that he is their spokesman. It did nothing for Buick to have Tiger Woods as their spokesman. Sales didn’t spike when he was popular and didn’t wane when he fell out of grace.
BTW..Lincolns recent success is due to new products being offered after years of nothing much. Their percentage year over year increase looks flashy because they were so far back in recent years. Jaguar is a prime example. They are up nearly 70% year over year sales on the strength of a couple of new models but hardly call them world beaters in the luxury market. Lincoln is the same.
Image is only one part of the puzzle. I never said that the product was not important by any stretch. Cadillac has been putting out world class products recently but have barely moved the needle sales wise. Part of that has to due to their less than stellar image not unrelated to years of product neglect and models like Cimmeron and Catera.
The automotive landscape has changed a lot since Cadillac was in its heyday and the top of the luxury heap in NA. Cadillac wanting to change to try and get there again is commendable. At least there is now positive effort to get there like significant monetary investment, dedicated mission focussed management and semi-autonomy from the rest of GM.
Only time will tell how it all works out. but at least there is a plan.
Dave – I was not making the case that if Matthew McConaughey drives Lincolns, everyone else will want to drive Lincolns. I have rarely seen him in a movie myself. I don’t care about the personal preferences of any actor or “celebrity”. I was saying that the Lincoln commercials featuring McConaughey are very well done. They manage to show off a lot of “cool luxury” surrounding the car, while at the same time stating “I didn’t drive Lincolns to be cool, I just liked them”. They manage to have it both ways, creating an image a lot of people would like to have, but saying “don’t follow the crowd, buy what you want”. That’s a lot better than Cadillac abandoning its proud American roots and attempting to remake itself as a “new”, Euro-style brand, based in a fashion design/coffee-house in Manhattan.
Also Dave – for the record I have never called anyone a “sucker” (or similar derisive term) for owning a Rolex. I simply said that while to some people the Rolex makes a statement such as “I’m a rich successful person”, to me it makes the statement “I’m a sucker for status symbols” – because clearly, a Rolex doesn’t tell time better than any other decent watch. Even as a piece of jewelry, it looks no better than many watches at a small fraction of the price. A Rolex is almost purely a status symbol, rather than containing functional value.
As far as the Cadillac image, a lot of people are saying that the Cimarron, Catera, and V8-6-4 engine hurt Cadillac’s image and it’s still recovering. Sure they hurt the image, but their influence has been exaggerated by the auto-writers. The Cimarron and V8-6-4 engines were a panicked reaction to the massive increase in gasoline prices experienced in the late 1970’s. European and Japanese cars were ready for that market, because they had long taxed gasoline at such high rates, that consumers favored smaller cars with smaller engines than in the USA. When gasoline prices in the US went through the roof, imports of these smaller, more fuel-efficient cars were suddenly selling well.
Cadillac made a mistake in rebadging (with an upgraded interior and different sheet metal) their smallest and cheapest Chevrolet, the Cavalier, as a Cimarron. But this car was hardly much worse than the small BMW’s of the same era, with which it was meant to compete. It was just cramped, underpowered, and overall of poor quality for a Cadillac. But it was a rush job. Eventually the Cimarron became more refined, but the initial impression stuck (thanks car-writers).
The V8-6-4 engine was an innovative attempt to make a fuel efficient, though still V8 (when power was called upon) engine, again to meet the sharply increased fuel prices. Good idea, another rush job, not ready for prime time. Cadillac image suffered, but professional car critics were merciless. They did not hit foreign cars as hard with such criticism, when they made mistakes. How often do you hear car critics complain that Mazda’s fuel hungry Wankel engine hurts their image to this day? They don’t, because it doesn’t. But for some reason car critics like to trash American cars rather than imports.
The Catera was again a panicked reaction by Cadillac, which at this point was losing market share to German luxury cars. So they brought in a total German car to “compete”. Looked German (rounded), drove German (RWD, hard-riding, tight handling), had some innovative high-tech features, just like the Germans. Because it was German engineered, German designed, and even German built – all Cadillac did was put a badge on it. The thinking apparently was “if they want the German version of luxury, now Cadillac has that too”, with the Catera. Unfortunately the Catera also had the worst of German bad reliability, which is somehow the best kept secret in the auto business – that German cars have significant maintenance/reliability issues. Again, the auto writers went nuts about the Catera’s problems, while not mentioning much about the similar ones with other German cars. Somehow the German Catera hurt the image of US engineered, US designed, US made Cadillacs? And drove even more people to buy German badged cars? Think how crazy that is.
Now if Cadillac had just stayed true to its mission of building large, fully-powered, roomy, made in the USA cars – the Cimmaron, V8-6-4, and Catera would never have happened. Would Cadillac’s image still be great? Probably not. But that is because auto-writers pushed the lemming baby boomers into imports, by being derisive of true American luxury cars (not the faux badge-Cadillacs like the Cimarron and Catera). Baby boomers fancy themselves as rebels, but they are the biggest bunch of followers I’ve ever seen. Many won’t consider an American car, simply because that’s not what people in “their crowd” buy. So I blame mainly the auto-writers and the crowd-following baby boomers, coupled with Cadillac’s failure to respond with marketing that embraced Cadillac’s virtues, rather than running away from them and trying to copy the imports.
“Value” is not something a luxury brand should be trying to push. Rich people from around the world don’t want to stay at the St. Regis because they have a “HUGE SUNDAY SALE!!!”. They want to stay there because they know the quality of the product.
Cadillac doesn’t want to be a “middle-class-I-worked-hard-and-save-up-for-twenty-years-to-get-a-Caddy-when-I-retire” kind of car. They want to be a world-class elite brand. The minute you lower your prices (relative to your market segment) to try and accommodate people who used to be able to afford a Cadillac, you start to erode all of that brand image. GM is doing a decent job of building up Buick in to that market position. If you can’t afford a Cadillac anymore, sorry but the brand has outgrown you.
The prices Cadillac is charging are reasonable, given their cars’ capabilities. Their prices are NOT reasonable, given their brand image today. That brand image is what they’re trying to change. How do you change that image? You make it part of a lifestyle young people enjoy and aspire to. Like what? Well, young wealthy people like fashion, urban living, high-end coffee shops…exactly what Cadillac has been doing. Plenty of people think that’s stupid, I get it; but, that just means you’re not Cadillac’s target demographic anymore, sorry.
I think most people upset with Cadillac’s direction are older people who are upset at one, or more, of three things:
1: Cadillac doesn’t make the same kind of cars THEY happened to grow up seeing.
2: Cadillac doesn’t make cars they can afford anymore
3: They’re not Cadillac’s target demographic anymore
True that! Older fans are outraged because they feel left out/Cadillac does not reflect their 1965 notion of luxury.
I’m 40, see Cadillac and it’s current rebranding as flawed, but for very different reasons than the baby boomers on here.
As a domestic, Cadillac is giving up its “home field” advantage by closing so many dealerships. I also find Cadillac styling to be lacking and melodramatic. I can’t help but feel that Jaguar presents an alternative vision of luxury compared to the Germans, that Cadillac should be taking a cliser look at. I also think that Cadillac lacks sex appeal in a Volvo-like way which will doom the brand.
Cadillac should consider partnering with hip fashion companies for interior design. These brands don’t need to be American as younger buyers think globally.
Again Cadillac is not closing any dealerships. They have rolled out a new program to improve the dealership experience for existing and potential clients. If a dealership does not want to participate they can choose a buyout.
This is not a forced closure. Entirely on a volunteer basis.
There is no home field advantage at this time. Ask BMW. MB, AUDI, Lexus and others. have the market cornered.
Clearly potential clients are speaking with their wallets (or purses) and saying they want that type of vehicle and ‘American’ style luxury.
I agree that Cadillac is going a different direction than they have traditionally but I do not think they are entirely forsaking their old client base.
Cadillac still offers a very good value with their recent offerings like the CT6 and XT5. They both represent very good value in their respective segments. Also there is still the XTS that will stick around a few more years which should still appeal to the former DTS and STS buyers.
True that Cadillac is not relying on deep discounts to drive sale. That is a smart move moving forward.
Dave, the STS and DTS looked similar to each other, but had different driving dynamics. One car could never really replace both. The STS was smaller, sleeker, RWD, and performance (handling, stiff ride) oriented. The DTS was bigger, FWD, and oriented toward ride quality over handling. As such, no replacement car can truly satisfy both groups. The XTS is popular to some extent because if currently offers Cadillac’s best ride in a sedan, and only FWD for a sedan. FWD makes it perform better in snow and rain, is more fuel efficient, and more cost-effective (lower build cost passed on to customer).
But the XTS rides too firmly for DTS owners, and it’s got too much Euro-rounding for fans of both DTS and STS shape. STS owners would more likely prefer the CTS, which like the STS is also RWD and firm riding. Furthermore, the clunky CUE system is not exactly what traditional Cadillac owners want. I’ve talked with Cadillac dealers about that, and they wish Caddy hadn’t gone with CUE for the DTS (apparently they get a lot of calls from baffled customers on a regular basis). So the XTS is not a good replacement, it attempted to be a compromise of the DTS and STS and failed for both. Again I’ve heard Cadillac dealers saying they wished they had more DTSs to sell, when the XTS first came out. Cadillac is definitely forsaking the old customer base, one step at a time. But the XTS does sell pretty well now, because as mentioned if you want Cadillac’s best riding sedan and Cadillac’s only FWD sedan, it’s your only current choice.
That upper middle class price point has disappeared unless buying compact luxury like BMW 3 Series.
Buick now fills that void of “soft” & affordable luxury.
I hate saying this but Cadillac design tries too hard lacking the quiet, self-assured ethos of brands like Audi, BMW, and now even Lincoln which seems to take Cadillac-like designs, remove the overly dramatic pomp (i.e. headlights) & round edges out.
I honestly think that Buick concepts capture luxury better than those done by Cadillac.
Cadillac produces great cars but Americans don’t care about solid driving dynamics–example, Lexus. I could see Lincoln with its crappy Ford underpinnings outsell Cadillac within five years.
I just love the armchair CEO’s who are already willing to off JDN and we have yet to see the first product he has overseen.
The CT6 and XT5 are the latest models and he had nothing to so with either. At this point he was left a large pile of crap to sort through that was over seen by now may Cadillac leaders in the last 10 years and try to start things over in an ever evolving market.
While Cadillac is much better than they were and still profitable they still have a lot of work to do on image and new
product.
As some have already wisely pointed out there is not Euro, American Luxury anymore as this is a global market. You have to make cars the world likes or you end up like FCA selling old platform Chrysler 300’s at a large discount for the price of a Malibu and making nothing on it.
The truth is the Luxury market is the most profitable in the world outside the trucks. You do not have to do large volumes to make money nor do you want to whore out the line and make a car just anyone can afford. Luxury is about exclusive and not about pink Mary Kay Cadillac’s.
The fact is you build the best car compelling cars people desire, Then you offer top line service from the dealers and build an image people want to be associated with. This take product and time and that is what is going on now. Cadillac has been damaged for several decades and it is not going to turn around over night, You are not going to be able to offer one six figure hyper car and earn back a reputation over night.
I am not sure where some of the thinking is coming from here as going back to what they were is just as effective as duck and cover in the 50’s. If Cadillac would return to the old ways they would be a smoking piece of carbon just as our duck and cover people.
There is no easy or cheap way forward. Everything needed has to be earned as nothing is given.
Will JDN fix everything? I don’t know but he at least is headed in the right direction. Time and product will tell. At least for now they are profitable and not a burden on GM. This gives them time to get things done.
Some of you think he is destroying the brand. Well I hate to tell you the old GM people did that long ago or did you miss the things like the Catera and Cimarron? How about the two failed two seaters? Better yet anyone one of you complainers have a failed 8-6-4?
With what some are calling for I don’t think you ever have been in a real luxury car?
As for market what have they got to market yet? The new direction product is not even here as of yet. Why send a message that the cars we have today are what Cadillac is when in 2-3 years they will be very different.
How many here have already complained about the ATS interior or the CTS dash? If it is not good enough for you then why would you be specific on this in marketing?
They are selling right now a mind set and as the new product comes it will entail the new things and the world class things as they come.
To do luxury right today you can no longer sell it like a Chevy as this is what got us to this point in the first place.
As for names The best damn cars in the world in the public eye have numbers, letter and some names. labels do not sell cars image sells cars in this class. If you are worried about names then you have product that is lacking. A new class leading car should sell even if it had no name at all on the flank so stop the crying.
The goal here for Cadillac is now to fix the cars to where they need to be and get more SUV products out. The SUV models will carry volume and not hurt image and then all Cadillac’s will carry profits that will be reinvested in more products and not be reliant on GM for funding. This will let them be more free to do the things that GM is keeping them from.
I am not going to say this will work but there is no way in hell I can say it will fail as they have not gone public with any new product yet of the new era here. I will wait and be fair and let the product determine if they win or lose. I will not base it on some preconceived disappointment expressed in public.
Folks this is only the first quarter here and there is a whole game to play yet.
Scott3, you say that Caddy should offer the best compelling cars that people desire. But what is “best”? Best at any price? Mercedes revived the Maybach brand and tried to capture a slice of the luxury market with the “best” cars, but they were too expensive, not well enough known, and did not sell well. Now they are offering a more modest Maybach that is essentially a stretched and gussied up S-Class, and for around $200k it can be yours. Is that the kind of “best” you think Cadillac should aim for? And what about Rolls Royce and Bentley? Or what about Ferrari and Lamborghini? To some people, those cars are “best”.
No matter what you claim about there only being one type of luxury car, there are actually at least two distinct types. One type offers race car dynamics, the other offers a comfortable, supple, isolated ride. Although it’s certainly possible to make a car with poor handling and a harsh ride, at the “best” end the two tend to become mutually exclusive – you have to choose one type of “luxury” over the other. Several decades ago, the Germans went to the “sport ride” side of luxury, the Americans to the “comfort side” with their version of luxury. In recent times Cadillac has virtually thrown in the towel on American luxury in pursuit of the German version of luxury, but that still doesn’t say which is “best”. Particularly when the German made Maybach (i.e. the car intended to be “the best”) actually goes more for the traditional American version of luxury than the traditional German one.
Regarding car names, Cadillac long had real names, and only since 2003 (with the XLR, soon followed by the SRX, STS, DTS, etc.) somewhat copied BMW, Audi, M-B, Lexus, Acura, Volvo, etc. with letters rather than names. JDN has further continued the copying by giving standard naming conventions, rather than ones that at least remotely hearken back to real names, such as Seville for STS, Deville for DTS, etc. On the other hand, Bentley and Rolls Royce have real names for their cars. So does Lamborghini (mostly). There was no compelling reason for Cadillac to switch from real names to letters, except as a follower rather than a leader. Does it really matter? No, but it’s reflective of a follower mindset, and it’s the mindset that is the problem, not the car names themselves.
As far as the Cadillac brand image having been destroyed by the flops that you mentioned, I disagree. Two things mainly hurt the brand, one was poor reliability – which is still a problem, but it’s as much a problem for the German luxury cars as well. The other was the confluence of the single-minded baby boom generation combined with the tastes of auto-writers. Reliability is self-explanatory, and should have driven American buyers to Japanese brands (and certainly Lexus benefitted) rather than German brands. But there became an overall perception that American brands were unreliable and German cars benefitted also from the perception that the hardy VW “beetle” gave them, which was the best known German import prior to the American/baby boom fascination with German cars. The VW bug was reliable, because – unusual for German cars – it was very simply made (as per “the people’s car” mandate) and established an inaccurate cachet of German reliability in American baby boomer minds. What is normal for German cars, like everything else – overengineering and faulty reliability as a result. Look at the weapons of WWII, German weapons were technically “better” – when they worked. But they were also unreliable, compared with the simpler weapons of the Soviets and Americans.
At any rate, American baby boomers mistakenly viewed German cars as more reliable, thanks to the VW bug (and perhaps the VW “combi” bus, to a lesser extent). Also, baby boomers are some of the least independent minded people ever. Although they view themselves as “rebels”, they only pretend to be rebels because that is what the rest of the group is doing. Ask a baby boomer what he likes, and he’ll have to ask another baby boomer what HE likes, before he knows. What they did know was that if their father liked something, they weren’t going to like it. So Cadillac never had much of a chance with that group, once it collectively latched onto the idea that they didn’t want American cars, and they did think imports were “better”, without giving it another thought (as noted, this group doesn’t do a lot of individual thinking).
Then there was also the “auto writer” factor. A small group of “enthusiasts” with similar mindsets, they viewed cars more as toys to be enjoyed, rather than instruments of transportation. As such, they cared about things such as “feel the road”, and tight handling, fast track times, RWD “balance”, and even specifics such as favoring round analog gauges over digital speedometers (again reflecting a “racing” mindset rather than a leisurely driving one). The German cars offered the more “race car” and “engaged” (i.e. busy, feel-the-road) than American ones, so again the auto writers favored them in print. The baby boomers – again unable to make their own decisions as to what they liked – ate it up and acted accordingly.
But did Cimarron, Catera, and V8-6-4 really hurt Cadillac’s brand? To a smaller extent yes, but not as much as reliability, baby boomer rejection of America and embracing German, and auto-writer preferences influencing baby boomers. The Cimarron was a bad idea to take a Cavalier (Chevy’s cheapest sedan at that time) and give it some Cadillac trim. Eventually the car was “ok” with some refining, but Caddy should never go that downscale, and it learned its lesson. And this was 30 years ago, a one-off that should not have hurt the brand if it had otherwise been bullet-proof. The Catera was not a bad car on paper, but it was a typically over-engineered German car, not an American one. When everything worked on the Catera, it was a nice car (remember German WWII weaponry, when it worked), but it was unreliable. Lesson there is that Caddilac should be engineered and built in America, especially for the American market.
Now the V8-6-4 was an innovative approach to the huge increase in gasoline prices during the late 1970’s. Caddy wanted an engine with power when needed, that could shut off cylinders and save gas at other times. Good idea, poor execution. I attribute it to the general panic caused by higher gasoline prices, that left most US car makers (other than AMC) a bit clueless on how to respond. European and Japanese car makers already had to deal with high gas prices, due to their high taxation of gasoline. So they were already equipped for this, Japan with their (underpowered) 4 cylinder engines and small cars, Europe with turbo-equipped small cars. Chrysler went the right way by embracing turbos, but for some reason there was an American mindset against turbocharged engines (a mistaken belief that the engines would wear out quickly, and also that “turbo lag” was somehow a huge setback). I love turbos, I even loved the turbo whine they used to have (now muffled in modern cars). At any rate, Cadillac tried to be innovative and solve a problem with the V8-6-4, but that should not be held against them. I doubt you’d find even 5% of Americans currently in the market for a luxury car that are familiar with the V8-6-4 engine. And if you did, maybe Cadillac should get points for being innovative, unlike today as a follower.
Finally – when it comes to selling cars, it’s about more than just “building what the public wants”. As Steve Jobs knew, the public doesn’t know what it wants. Did the public know they wanted an I-phone or an I-pad or and I-pod, or an affordable GUI-interface computer, even a basic personal computer, before Apple offered them? No. Apple made them, then told the public this is what they should have. Cadillac used to do that, now they don’t. They just say “let’s do whatever the Germans do”. That’s too bad. If Cadillac went back to true American luxury (i.e, plush riding, well-powered, roomy, innovative/elegant designs), they could SELL the benefits to the public rather than saying “we are like the Germans, but cheaper”. They could LEAD, they could take the BIG PROFITS. Just as they did in the past. Not with the same cars and designs of 40-50-60 years ago, but with modern designs, modern technology. Better yet, with modern reliability. But they don’t need to copy Euro-style and Euro-ride and Euro-naming, and they shouldn’t, IMO. Be a leader, be Cadillac. Be “the Cadillac of cars”, not “the BMW of America”.
Luxury is really two classes right now for the average buyer. the value luxury that is Hyundai, Lincoln, Lexus, Acura, Buick and The like.
Then there is the higher class luxury that comes at a price and that is all the higher brands. As to the car and image it just depends on what you want to spend. Even these brands are bridging over to the lower end now like Audi with some cheaper models. etc. There are some variation with each as there are no hard fast rules.
My point with Cadillac has been they do not need to bridge as GM has Buick in that gap.
Second Cadillac does not need to beat anyone volume wise. Cars like Chevy and Ford are volume cars at a lower price and when you spend more for a car you are paying for more exclusive. How exclusive you want to be depends on how much you want to spend.
These cars are more toy than transportation. The fact is no one needs a car like this these are cars that peoples images are represented by and their dreams are built on. The fact is we all could get by in life just fine with a Spark but few people want that image nor dream.
Look at who buy these cars. High rollers that want to be seen as successful. They roll up to a business lunch and if they are in a expensive car it shows they are successful. Other s are not successful but they want the image and often spend more on the car than the home they live in. there is always the smaller segments that like the technology and performance too. But the fact is image sells here and the better the image the more you can ask for the right of this.
As for the 8-6-4 and other things. GM has always had great technology but in the 1970-2005 era they often rushed it to market and created issues by doing it with the lack of needed technology or just at too low of a cost.
Then they took Cadillac and made them cheaper and unchanged with where the market was going. The fact was they were building floaty cars when less and less wanted them. The kind of cars the Germans built were what the market wanted not that they are so much German cars.
The Germans got it while others failed to change with the market.
in the 70’s the small little cars were seen as cheap Japan imports and today that small efficient cars are where the market is. They are not seen as regional anymore and that is the same here.
Here is the deal.
Many mistake Cadillac for tying to be a German Luxury car. The truth is they are aiming to be a Luxury car that the market wants. Just because they handle better and they have more power does not make them a German copy as the market drives the direction what what the market is. Just because the German brans are the ones that followed the trend the best and fulfilled what the market wanted still does not make what the segment a German segment,
Now there are some cheaper brands that have done German copies right down to the styling. I do not see Cadillac doing this.
Today Cadillac is trying to fill the segment with cars that are what people want with true Cadillac styling and not trying to look but anything but a Cadillac.
As for numbers vs names. The Germans got that from the American Luxury brands when they were the leaders years ago. If you bought a Cadillac in the teens to the 40’s you bought a model number not a name.
The bottom line here is non of us have seen the future yet as for what JDN has planned. As it is the head of Cadillac and staff has been a revolving door. I expect improvement just because of stable leadership for one. How well will the improvement go well that is up for the market to decide.
Like I am have clearly stated we need to let JDN present his models and then let the market decide how he is doing. For us to judge now is like being critical over a meal that we have not eaten yet. He may fail horribly but until he does we can prove nothing.
Also do not expect major victories over night. It will take several models to move the needle. Just one model and good or bad will not make or break the future for Cadillac. Image is like a brick building built on many models over several layers.
Scott3, thanks for the response. As I wrote to “jamdown” above, I don’t understand why someone would own something mainly as a “status symbol”, unless they have major self-esteem issues. If they want something, they should want it because they like it themselves, regardless of whether anyone else knows they have it. That being said, I’ll accept that some people will buy products in great part of “status symbol” value. But that’s not the “two types of luxury cars” I’m talking about.
The two types of luxury cars are not “value for the money” and “excessive cost status symbols”, they are “sports car ride” German-style luxury cars, and “comfortable ride” American-luxury cars. Unfortunately Cadillac has given up on the American version of luxury in pursuit of German style luxury. And it goes beyond mere riding/handling styles, or roomy vs. cramped styles too. The German idea of luxury has a fetishist devotion to insignificant details, such as the weave of the stitching in the leather seats, or the lining of the glove compartment, or the click sound of the buttons, etc. Who cares? Yet Cadillac now has the mindset of “if the Germans do it, we have to do it too”, instead of blazing their own path to useful luxury as they used to do.
What if the Germans started gold-plating their engines, and telling people it was “more luxury” that way? Sure it might look somewhat cool when you lift up the hood, but it would add a lot to the cost without enhancing the functionality one bit. In the past, Cadillac would have said “fine, let them be idiots and gold-plate the engines”. Now Cadillac would say, “if the Germans are gold-plating their engines, then we must do that too”. That’s being a Euro-follower, not an American leader and icon.
You say that Cadillac is not making exact replicas of German cars, like Hyundai might try to do. Fair enough, the exteriors of Cadillacs are still slightly different than the German ones, though JDN is fighting Mark Reuss on that, as JDN wants even the exterior styling to be more German-like, while Reuss wants it to remain American (clean straight lines rather than endless rounding swoops and curves). The fact is that Cadillac has essentially conceded the German version of luxury (sports car handling, fetishist attention to irrelevant details, etc.) rather than adhering to the American version of luxury (aka smooth, roomy comfort and useful tech).
You are right that JDN has not presented all-new models of Cadillacs yet. But everything I’ve seen, from his former Audi and Infiniti past, to his fights with Reuss over wanting Cadillac more Euro-styled, to his moving to Manhattan – suggests that he wants to destroy Cadillac’s history, pretend Cadillac is a new company, and follow the German version of luxury rather than the American one.
And as far as “building what the market demands”, that’s ridiculous. The market never knows what it wants, it has to be told. I don’t mean sell them on something worthless, but sell them on the real merits of the unique product you have to sell. Cadillac doesn’t do that any more, they don’t sell real American luxury, they just let the Germans create their own version of luxury and they follow that same path. If Steve Jobs had the same mindset, he would have let IBM dictate the computer market, he’d have let Sony dictate the consumer music market, etc. Instead he offered products that the market didn’t even know it wanted, and he sold them on its merits. Yes he had useful products, not gimmicks, but he did not wait for “what the market tells him it wants”.
Don’t tell me that the American public was really demanding a hard-riding, “feel the road” sports-handling experience in their daily drivers, a fetishist devotion to the quality and look of carpeting in the trunk, jarring low-profile tires, rounded lines, etc. – no the Germans came up with those things, the auto writers decided this was the way to go, the America-hating baby boomers embraced what they were told to embrace, but there’s absolutely no reason that those things should be considered “luxury” today. It was a sales job to the gullible and nothing else, but there’s no reason that Cadillac can’t sell an American product rather than bowing its head and trying to be “almost German” in pursuit of the German version of luxury. It’s sad actually. But I don’t expect non-Americans like JDN, Uwe Ellinghaus, Andrew Smith, etc. to understand Cadillac as the great American car, or have a clue as to what the “Cadillac ride” means.
Why is Cadillac willing to spend $50 million to close down 43 percent of its dealers? First, GM’s luxury brand has way more dealerships than it needs. Second, the 400 dealers with offers to shutter each sold 50 or fewer vehicles in 2015, representing just 9 percent of its sales volume in America. So, while closing these smaller dealerships may have a small initial impact on sales, it’s not going to be a major hit to Cadillac.
As for status and image most people buy cars like this for just that reason. You may be the odd man out and that is find but the truth is that is why they buy them.
Lets face it few Ferrari’s are driven in anger just as most M3 and AMG cars.
Paris Hilton drives a Mclaren not because she does track time.
It is not Americans want hard riding cars but as much as they want responsive driving cars. If soft floating boats were still in demand that is what they would be building.
But to be fair and honest todays cars and the suspension they have generally ride pretty well and handle great. It is a good mix of both and no one is really losing any fillings or damaging a kidney.
The fact is with Cadillac styling is the A&E has evolved. Why? Because the hard lines were aging poorly. I am not sure where you get Mark and JDN are fighting as nothing has been reported.
The truth is the CT6 is a Mark Ruess product and JDN had nothing to do with it other than the into. The car was done before he got there. The XT5 also was done and the styling was all Mark.
The new refresh on the ATS and CTS are things that would have happened as they are both due and there is little you can do about it.
As for the show cars they are just that show cars. Lets wait to see just what shows up before we toss anyone under the bus.
As for market demands? What are you smoking. Cadillac wants to build cars but what is the public buying? SUV and CUV models so what are all the Luxury brands jumping into including Cadillac? Not new cars.
The market is still the driving force of what companies make. Most companies toss out a veritey of vehicles and then once something takes they go all in on it till something new strikes the public fancy.
We have seen this with the Trucks, SUV, CUV and Minivan. Right now everyone is looking for the next big thing and then they all will follow to garner the publics purchase.
What kind of Luxury car is selling anything that has Euro influence in the styling. How many years did Infinity try to sell their own thing and failed?
The Move to NYC was really to put more space between GM and Cadillac to let them go uninterrupted as they have been interrupted too much by GM in Detroit.
Just ask Mark on the CT6 as he has a good story on how he tried to put on a better quality door handle on the car only to be rebuked by the board. It was only a few dollars more and you shut down your product guy from doing what was right?
The goal of Cadillac is to be run independent of GM authority. The first step was to move them away from easy modelling. The next step it to take profits from the number of SUV and CUV models to make Cadillac able to pay their own way and not have to rely on money from GM.
The key to Cadillac future is Autonomy from GM. They will not be handed it and will have to work and fight for it.
If they continue to make money they can pay their own way.
Understanding Cadillac is difficult for many as one they hate change. As it is Cadillac was going to die with out some major changes. Two there are many things going on that are not public and the infighting has been seen but not fully understood. We know there is a tug of war but not sure of the details. In time this will surface and make more sense.
As of understanding. Just take this dealer issue. Yes they want to kill 400 dealers but they accounted for only 9% of sales. These sales should be going to the stronger dealers and fewer dealers to make for a much stronger and better dealer network. Right now selling a Cadillac is a part time job for some combined Chevy, Buick and GMC salesman and that should not be so.
As for buying and selling Luxury it is just like selling a Rolex. A Time X keeps as good time as any Rolex. But when you see a person wearing a Rolex it sends a signal of what you are and what you are worth or in too many cases what you want people to think you are worth.
If you are going to a meeting and want investors in a Idea. Would you have a better shot getting them to invest if you are driving a Spark or a CTSV? You may not think that way but most others do right or wrong.
Scott3, interesting to hear your thoughts even though I do not think the same way. While I feel there may be a “Rolex element” involved with the purchase of luxury cars, my belief has been that the buyers actually feel they are getting a better car. They can afford it, so they get the luxury car because they want to drive it. The Rolex watch is purely for show, as it does not tell time better or even look better than other watches. All the Rolex says is “I have a lot of money to blow”. It’s the equivalent of getting a gold-plated engine for your car. No increased functionality whatsoever.
Now in the case you are making, the Rolex would actually be a sales tool. And so could be a luxury car. But that could work against you as well. If a financial advisor drives a Rolls Royce to see their clients, the clients might feel they are getting ripped off to fund the lifestyle of the advisor. If I were going to invest with someone, I’d rather see them wearing a Timex than a Rolex, because I’d figure they were watching expenses and only paying for value rather than status. On the other hand, if the person had a shabby suit with rips in it, and a broken down Yugo as his car, I’d be worried that the person was not the successful money manager he claimed to be. So there’s a difference between adequacy and luxury.
I have a successful eye surgeon friend and neighbor who is from Germany, whom I assume could afford any type of car he wants. Does he own a Maybach? S-Class? Porsche? No, he owns a Toyota Camry. I talked with him about it, he says he doesn’t need anything more than that, and he likes the ride and reliability. He said German cars require too much maintenance. And obviously he didn’t care about status symbols. But it’s not like the Camry is a bad car, it’s fully adequate for most people.
Think of having a nice stereo in your home. Unless you have a lot of parties where it gets played, most people won’t even know you have it. You own it because you want it, for yourself. I have yet to meet the woman who falls for a guy because of his cool stereo, or the neighbor who thinks “wow that guy must be killing it in business” because of his stereo. So not all luxury is about status symbols, a lot of it is just having something nice that you want, and the ability to pay for it.
I disagree with you that today’s Cadillacs or today’s cars in general strike a good balance between a comfortable ride and good handling. It’s moved way onto the side of handling, and far, far away from comfortable riding. Perhaps you are too young to have been in the cars of prior decades which rode much better, and/or you’ve never been in a truly nice riding car on the road today (there are very few now). My DTS Premium is one of the nicest riding cars of the past 10=15 years, but it’s barely adequate in terms of the type of ride I like, and it’s certainly firmer than the Cadillacs of the past. To me anything that rides stiffer than a DTS (and that means every new Cadillac today), no longer has anything that could remotely be called a “Cadillac ride”.
Now I don’t think Cadillac will completely die off, but it’s now a somewhat meaningless name plate. Today it means “BMW wannabe”, tomorrow it may be imitating something else. Too bad it can’t just be Cadillac, that’s a missed opportunity for GM to rake in the big profits and sell a lot of cars that people actually want. They should let people who want BMW buy BMWs, and let Cadillac be Cadillac. But that’s life.
By the way, the Catera that you mentioned as hurting Cadillac’s image – it was a decent attempt at a high tech car, but it was engineered and made in Germany, not the USA. It was overly rounded for a Cadillac (though typically German), and RWD unlike the Cadillacs of the time, also hard-riding for a Cadillac. Typically bad German reliability hurt the Catera, ironic that this car would hurt Cadillac’s reputation and push customers to buy German engineered cars, when Germany was actually the source of the problem. Even the darn Catera “duck” cartoon (Ziggy) was apparently from Germany, and the whole Catera fiasco eventually led to the stripping of the merlettes from the Cadillac symbol.
Which is too bad, because the merlettes were iconic, part of a faked coat of arms that the equally fake-named “Mr. Cadillac”, Antoine Laumet, founder of Detroit apparently designed to give himself a status symbol. So if you believe that buying a Cadillac is more of a status symbol purchase than for functional luxury, it’s ironic that a German engineered/built car and German ad campaign killed part of Cadillac’s literal status symbol and added (by subtraction of Cadillac) to the cachet of German cars while reducing the status of American engineered and built Cadillacs.
Plenty of people agree with you regarding spending money on luxury items, and whether it’s worth it or just showing off.
Point is, Cadillac wants to at least be on one side of that equation. They would love it if their cars were as well regarded as Mercedes or Bentley, in that someone could be described as “showing off” when a Camry would do just as well, because you don’t need all of that fine wood, expensive leather, etc. Of course you don’t need all of that, that’s why it’s a luxury. If you needed it, it would be a necessity.
Cadillac wants to create a world where if you want a car that’s just “nice enough”, get a Buick. If you want something that really is best of the best, get a Cadillac. That’s the way it used to be.
In terms of ride quality, the S-Class is top of the class in that regard. It’s smooth, quiet, relaxing, and refined. Plus, it does all of that without the wallow of the DTS. The S-Class is also on another planet vs. the DTS on interior quality. The DTS has fake wood, plastic buttons, lower-grade leather, fewer comfort features (though it is older, but even compared to same-year S-Class), and a generally lower-rent build.
If you want to be the best, you have to understand why all of that matters.
NewQ, Cadillac – like many other luxury car makers – claims to be “the best”. But that’s more a marketing term than a statement of fact or even a goal. Price is always a consideration. Mercedes tried to make a spare-no-expense car that was “best”, the Maybach from 2004-2012. They lost a lot of money on it, as it simply didn’t sell enough units to remotely justify development costs. Today there is a more stripped version of the Maybach, essentially an elongated S-Class, that sells for a mere $200k or so. Does Cadillac need to surpass the Maybach across its line-up? No.
You can always find some limited production, massively priced car that is “better” in some ways than “your” car. Again, “being the best of the best” is a marketing thing, not an achievable goal for a brand that wants to sell a cost-effective number of cars. Cadillac has never tried to truly compete with Rolls Royce, Bentley, or Ferrari for that matter. Someone is always going to have a more sparkling hand-polished grille, or do even faster times at the Nürburgring test track. At a massive price of course. Despite the marketing concept of “being the best”, the fact is that “best” is subjective, and there are cost factors involved, always.
As I’ve noted, perhaps some day the Germans will start gold-plating the engines of their luxury cars. Does that mean that Cadillac needs to do the same, in order to “be the best”? But in what realistic way would gold-plating the engine do anything to improve performance? All it would do is drive up the cost, which I guess is what you like anyway, since you apparently have endless money and don’t want any remotely ordinary people to driver “your” car.
You mention “the way it used to be” in terms of Cadillac. The reality is that Cadillacs today are better built than they have ever been. The only thing not as good about today’s Cadillacs as in the past is the ride quality, and that’s a decision that has been made in order to copy BMW’s hard ride, not a “cheapening” of the brand.
As far as the Cadillac DTS vs. the Mercedes S-Class, the DTS cost roughly half what the S-class cost. At over $50k (when last produced in 2011) for an upper-trim DTS, it was not a cheap car. But of course the additional $50k or so for the S-class should get you some more expensive materials. Do more expensive materials make for a significantly “better” car? Not necessarily. So maybe the S-class uses more expensive leather than the DTS, it’s not as if the DTS has burlap-quality leather – it’s very good leather. 99.9% of the public wouldn’t say the DTS had “cheap leather”, nor could they tell any difference with what you think is “good leather”.
And who cares about fake wood trim or plastic buttons? Real wood is subject to warping, rot, and termites. You probably spend more time in front of a computer or I-phone than in front of a car dashboard, and I bet your computer monitor and I-phone are not made of real wood. I bet you push plastic buttons on a computer mouse or smart-phone, without thinking “yuck, this is plastic”.
As far as ride quality, the DTS hands-down had the best ride quality of any Cadillac sedan made in the past 10 years. It did not “wallow” as you claim. You’ve obviously never driven a DTS. Did the ride quality match up with the twice as expensive S-class of the same year? Possibly not. And it probably didn’t match Rolls Royce or Maybach in ride quality either. Did the DTS make a lot of money for GM? All signs are that it did. Was it a good car? That’s very subjective, but used DTSs are in high demand from Cadillac fans, so I’d hardly put it in Cimarron or Catera territory.
Cadillac might not match every ultra-expensive marketing gimmick that you would wish they had, however it has made smart decisions in the past about which type of “luxury” matters to their customers. It has never attempted to truly be Bentley or Rolls Royce, and that’s a good thing for GM and for Americans who are not in the top 1% of the 1%. And my guess is that Cadillac won’t be gold-plating their engines any time soon, even if someone else decides that is “best”.
It’s true, the DTS and S-Class are worlds apart in terms of quality and price. I’m not claiming the DTS was overpriced, if anything it was very fairly priced for what it was.
But, it just goes to show that the DTS and the S-Class compete in very different markets.
There’s just more money and reputation to be had by competing where the S-Class competes. Not every car of course; the whole line-up doesn’t need to start at $98K.
But, Cadillac used to max out at the DTS level, and Mercedes used to max out (and still does largely) at the S-Class level. The two automakers were playing very different games to very different customers, across the board.
Everyone has their own opinion on wood trim (many younger customers prefer carbon fibre), or leather, etc. And some people probably think fake wood, plastic buttons are okay, or don’t mind them. But the vast majority of people who have a lot of money would probably disagree. Again, at the price point of the DTS, there’s nothing wrong with any of that, but the it’s the sheer fact that they were competing at that price point in the first place that shows how far Cadillac has to go.
So NewQ – let me get this straight – it’s not so much the DTS itself you didn’t like, it’s just that you didn’t like it being the “flagship” Cadillac sedan when the Mercedes S-Class was clearly “better” (for twice the price)? And you’d have been happy as long as Cadillac had also offered a car for twice the price of the DTS, that went feature-for-feature against the S-class of that time?
I guess that makes some sense, except, people could already buy the S-Class for their $100+ thousand. What ever happened to offering something different than your competitors? I guess if it made a $100k flagship to “help the brand image” and still offered good cars at $50k or so, I could be fine with that. But didn’t Cadillac do something like that with the XLR two-seat convertible? That car was well over $100k as I recall, it was supposed to be the “flagship” of the brand and add cachet to the line, but it didn’t sell well and Cadillac hasn’t sold a convertible (at any price) since then. Seems to me they aimed too high.
One more thought on the DTS vs. S-Class – reliability. I’m pretty sure the DTS is more reliable than the S-Class, and to me reliability is a luxury feature. The DTS was derided by auto-makers as having only a 4-speed transmission when the Germans had 6 or more, but that 4-speed hydramatic was/is practically bullet-proof and was perfectly mated with the Northstar V8. Very smooth shifting, lots of low end torque. And even milage was decent for a heavy 4 speed with a V8, though that was the only drawback to not having more gears. But the auto-writers are set in their ways, and when they see 4-speed they automatically dock it many points, without even considering the smoothness or reliability.
As far as Mercedes reliability, I’ve never owned one but I’ve heard a lot of problems with those and other German cars. I love the Scotty Kilmer video on youtube called “Why not to buy a Mercedes” (1.7 million views already), check it out sometime.
Ultimately, yes. I use the S-Class and 7-Series as benchmarks because they are the best of the best of the “regular” cars, before you get into Rolls-Royce and Bentley territory.
I guess there’s a market for a car like the DTS, I just don’t see the qualities of that car lending brand value or improving the image of Cadillac, hence why I don’t think it shouldn’t be a Cadillac at all.
This isn’t a new idea. I forget who, but the head of GM (or maybe it was Ford) in the 60s said something along the lines of “you can sell a young man’s car to an old man, but you can’t sell an old man’s car to a young man”. The same is true here. You can get in to the details of what makes an “old” or “young” person’s car, but it’s safe to say the qualities of the DTS are more appreciated by older people.
Even the S-Class is certainly an “older” person’s car. But that car is so well made, so refined, so advanced, and so luxurious, it overcomes the stereotype by being more than *just* an older person’s car.
If Cadillac made a car like that, no one would be happier than me. It’s where the money is, and it’s where the reputation is. Yes, there’s value in “hitting them where they ain’t” and tackling market segments where the competitors don’t have product, but if the segment you have in mind is the “sub-luxury” or “near-luxury”, or some would even say “cheap-luxury”, I think that’s where Buick makes a strong case. And it would lower the overall prestige of the Cadillac brand, which is something GM is trying to build up. It’s something the brand used to have. Why not return to the days where Cadillacs were on par with Bentleys? Why not have Cadillacs that showed the world you were successful and could afford the best, not that the dealership had a bargain on a car that costs half as much as the real market leaders.
There’s something glamorous about the old movies and TV shows where they would name drop Cadillac to show how rich or successful a person was, or they would have them pull up slowly to indicate how exclusive a restaurant or club was. It would be wonderful if Cadillacs could command that again, but to do that they can’t remain in the lower part of the market just to accommodate existing customers.
Mercedes is in dangerous territory here too with the CLA; many people have said it’s “not a real Mercedes” and it hurts the brand a little bit.
NewQ wrote: “I guess there’s a market for a car like the DTS, I just don’t see the qualities of that car lending brand value or improving the image of Cadillac, hence why I don’t think it shouldn’t be a Cadillac at all”
You sell a car like the DTS, because it makes a lot of money for GM, it’s a real Cadillac (not a Cimarron or Catera), and a lot of people like it – not just older people.
But it sounds like all you want to do is “establish the luxury brand” with ultra-high price (over $100k) cars, and be as exclusive as possible. To the point where the brand is not going to make much money (if any at all), and very few people are going to be able to enjoy or even see these cars.
Do you know the point of having a business? It’s to make money. It’s not there to establish some level of luxury so high that almost no one can afford it, and the company doesn’t make much money.
I’d prefer having a company that made great cars that a large number of people can see and enjoy. The reason that Cadillac is prominent in songs, films, etc. is that they were common enough that people could actually see, own, and experience them. There are not many songs about Rolls Royce and Bentley (or S-Class, or Maybach) because those are so exclusive that the public rarely even sees them, much less rides in them or owns them.
I suppose you’d be happiest if Cadillac only made the world’s most expensive cars, and they limited production to maybe 10 units, one of which was owned by you. I on the other hand would be happy if everyone owned a car just as great as mine, as long as I owned a great one according to my own standards of what constitutes a great car. What I care about is the car itself, what you seem to care about is the exclusivity. To each his/her own.
I would be satisfied if they competed at the same level as Mercedes. They don’t have to exclusively compete at the Rolls-Royce/Bentley level, though one or two models up there would be nice.
I guess you could ask why would any brand want to compete at that level? Why don’t Mercedes and BMW lower their prices so more people can afford them? There’s a lot of money in that strata and staying somewhat exclusive is what allows them to command high prices. The more upmarket you go, the fatter the profit margins (up to a point, Bugatti loses money on every car).
Even BMW and Mercedes are increasingly reaching down market, which I think is risky, but they’re at least only broadening their line downwards, rather than moving the whole brand in that direction.
Oh for sure they think they are getting a better car but Image is the driver that pulls the trigger.
Just take a look at the many times the 3 series was not all that great of a car yet it sold.
Better yet just look at all the 944 and 924 Porsche cars old and they were mostly told to people shopping image and could not afford a 911. Both were not great cars yet they sold because of the name.
Ego sells a lot of cars.
It is not just the auto industry but clothing and even homes. I wish I could count the many times I see a house sold for nearly a million dollars and yet the people can not afford to put furniture in all the room or even curtains on all the windows.
People are image vain hence it sells a lot of cars.
To be honest many of these cars are not so much better. They may have more options and be a little faster but not enough to make them clearly worth the added cost with out image added in.
This is nothing new as Cadillac used to live on their image for years as it was a sign that you made it when you were seen driving one.
It at one time was the sign of success in America back in the 50’s.
For Cadillac they need to build a car that reflects the best in all areas and display an image that reflects well on the customer.
While the CTS is a very good car there is little image there right now and that is holding it back.
The fact is they need to take it up a notch. They also need to be seen in the right places with the right people. Add to this they need to present compelling designs that will attract attention.
In the case of BMW lets face it they are fun cars to drive but way over priced for what they are and essentially the same design with only a few changes here and there. Yet they continues to sell.
Mechanically they often need more service and often cost more to fix than the normal car.
If people only bought because they want a better car and do not care how it looks or what the image it projects then they buy a Honda or Toyota. If they want image they spend more. I am not sure why you think this is an isolated area when it is a prime are of driven sales. It is also the area that hurts Cadillac the most.
Why do people buy a Denali or Escalade because of image much more than the extra lights or more power.
“I am not sure where you get Mark and JDN are fighting as nothing has been reported.”
Do an internet search of “Reuss” and “de Nysschen” and “Cadillac”.
Example (from Bloomberg via Automotive News):
Cadillac President Johan de Nysschen and General Motors product development boss Mark Reuss are having a running debate over Cadillac’s edgy styling, according to a Bloomberg report last week.
De Nysschen wants something softer and “sophisticated,” he said, and would even delay some of Cadillac’s new models if he isn’t satisfied with the styling. Reuss said he doesn’t want a radical overhaul and favors a style that is uniquely American, and he added that he, not de Nysschen, is authorized to delay new models.
Drew,
Why are you attempting to paint an internal discussion as a negative?
First, all sorts of organizations, from Apple to Cisco and from Starbucks to Caterpillar, have internal discussions and debates. The goal, for product-oriented companies, is to ultimately create a better product. GM and Cadillac are no exception to this. Heck, we here at GM Authority have internal debates, sometimes heated, about what content to publish and when… all in the name of our readership. Most if not all of the time, I believe that it results in progress and a deeper, better understanding of what we do. The same rings true for other organizations.
Second, we have very few details about this so-called, reported and unconfirmed “internal debate” between JDN and Reuss. The details that we do have, have probably been skewed, twisted, or in some other way modified from what is actually taking place on their way to publication.
So, whatever is taking place is about creating a better product that appeals to more people, all in the name of higher sales volume and resulting profits at Cadillac.
All in all, it’s simply foolish to draw any significant conclusions about this. Personally, I’ll rest assured that whatever decisions reached by true automotive professionals with decades of experience at the pinnacles of their respective careers will be the right ones.
Hello Alex, actually I didn’t intend to paint the Reuss/de Nysschen disagreement about Cadillac’s future styling as a negative, just was noting that it exists. Or at least existed one year ago, when it came to light in the automotive press. I happen to favor Reuss’s view (edgy lines, “American/Cadillac” look vs. softening and rounding), but I agree that discussions are healthy and various points of view should be welcome – this does tend to lead to better/more salable products, as you suggest.
My post which included some detail about the Mark Reuss/Johan de Nysschen Cadillac styling disagreement was in response to Scott3 who said he hadn’t heard about it. My original point was that I feel JDN is pushing for Cadillac to be ever more Euro-like, including the styling. JDN may be right or he may be making a mistake in going that way, but I believe that’s where he wants to take the brand.
I’d like to think that every person in every career job is the right one for that job, making all the right decisions for their shareholders, employees, and customers, at all times. History tells me though that mistakes have been made, even by people with decades of experience and at the pinnacles of their careers. In any case, it will be interesting to see how it all plays out over the years; our discussion now is very interesting but none of us can know the future.
I’m confused.
Wouldn’t reducing dealer and servicing locations reduce potential customers from buying your product?
I know for me if I was in the market for buying a car, dealer networking is a major contributing factor in the decision process.
“Wouldn’t reducing dealer and servicing locations reduce potential customers from buying your product?”
It would, albeit not as much as you might think. Since luxury consumers are largely located in cities and their suburbs, these placeusually have a larger population base of luxury consumers to market to. Those dealerships located outside major urban centres like in rural environments or those that are lower in urban hierarchy ratings usually have a smaller population of luxury buyers. At Cadillac, it means ‘going where the action is’, and that means going where the greatest numbers of luxury buyers are.
As someone above who mentioned that this means gutting the number of dealership in the Midwest, they’re wrong and they’re missing the point. There will still be Cadillac dealers in Minneapolis, Chicago, Detroit, and Columbus as these are just a few of the major urban centers in the Midwest. If there are any Cadillac dealers in Duluth, Columbia, Iowa City, or Peoria, then they may want to take the money and run.
Dealers must also put out ads for their products to sell. If their sales are so low, they are not doing that part. So they don’t deserve to be Cadillac dealers.
Cadillac is trying to improve their “image” by closing dealers where the brand is seen with other American/GM cars. I don’t agree with it, but that’s part of their push to “internationalize” the image. And they certainly don’t want rural people driving their cars, because again it hurts their “cosmopolitan” image. Sad thing is, rural people are more likely to appreciate Cadillac’s status as an American icon, oh well.
That is not it at all.
Cadillac is trying to change their dealer experience and tying money from the headoffice to sales performance.
Read the article. These small dealership (under 50 units per year) account for less than 10% of the yearly sales totals in US. Those dealers do not have the resources to fund the kind of dealer experience Cadillac wants. No doubt those 400 dealers are drowning in red ink. Think about it, selling 4 or 5 new cars per month but still have to pay to keep a full dealership going.
Since the new dealer standards are going to be uniform those dealers will not be able to survive so why not offer them a way out?
Drew it just comes down to numbers plain an simple. Small town dealers do little to add to the volume and profits to the other dealers and to GM.
Just as with Cadillac is not a car that everyone should be able to afford it is also not a car that everyone should sell.
As for dealers even Chevy has too many dealers and the composition should be with Toyota and Honda not with other Chevy dealers. The local dealers could be more profitable with less inter city competition.
Just note the number of Chevy dealers vs. Toyota and Honda. Even the Ford dealers here now have fallen for the same reasons.
It is much less image as it is profits and stronger dealers. you can have one strong dealer in a metro area or you can have 4 dealers all cutting the same piece of cake in 4 pieces than one.
I think this is okay.
If I’m a luxury buyer, and I mean *real* luxury buyer, not someone who thinks $29 sea bass at a Flint-area restaurant is the best of the best, and I walk in to look at a Cadillac, and I see a Chevy Malibu, or even a Buick LaCrosse on the floor, I’m out of there.
Sorry, how can someone working with and selling Chevy possibly understand the kind of lifestyle I live, or relate to me, or provide the kind of experience I want?
NewQ wrote: “…I walk in to look at a Cadillac, and I see a Chevy Malibu, or even a Buick LaCrosse on the floor, I’m out of there. Sorry, how can someone working with and selling Chevy possibly understand the kind of lifestyle I live, or relate to me, or provide the kind of experience I want?”
Seriously? Are you that much of a self-absorbed snob, or is this some sort of sarcasm?
1. Who the heck cares what kind of lifestyle you live? It’s a car.
2. How can the Chevy-selling person relate to you? Because you are both human beings.
3. How can that person provide the kind of experience you want? What experience do you want, to be carried around the dealership in a sedan-chair? Be served endless mint juleps and fanned with feathers? It’s a car dealership! They know cars. You go in, you talk to them, you test drive cars, you talk about price if you want. Chevy, Buick, Cadillac – so what if they are all together in the same place? They are all cars! How and when did you become better than everyone else?
I certainly understand the sentiment, I really do, and I’m not making the case that it’s right or “moral”, or anything else.
I’m making the case that this is how luxury buyers feel. It’s the same reason no one wants to stay at a Ritz-Carlton attached to a Courtyard Marriott, and the same reason no one wants to buy a Patek-Phillipe at Target. Hell, I’m pretty sure they only reason they put business and first class on the same planes as coach is because of physical logistical limitations.
Yes it’s car, but it’s also a house, a watch, a hotel, a vacation, a whiskey, or any other luxury item. People in this segment lead a certain kind of lifestyle, and they want the things they buy to be an extension of that lifestyle. That means every experience they have is refined and sophisticated. A showroom full of Chevys does not make that happen. Chevys are nice little cars, but not for me.
Mercedes, Porsche, and even higher up the ladder to Rolls-Royce and Bentley, all of them understand that their customer has an expectation. Their standards are higher than a test drive and chat about engine choices. They want to understand why the product is special, how they can customize it to their specific needs, and how it fits in the same lifestyle as a Brioni suit, or an upcoming getaway to the Four Seasons in Bali. A dealership with people who are trained to work with people like that, and understand the kind of life those people lead, is required to properly service that kind of customer.
I think the displeasure expressed here isn’t related to Cadillac, or even luxury cars in general. It’s related to this kind of lifestyle and customer. Why is this person so much better than me? Why do they want to have special little “experiences” away from “normal people”? A hotel is just a room you sleep in, who needs marble tubs or whatever silly pillows they have?
I think people are upset because that’s the market segment where Cadillac is trying to go. And to a lesser extent, they’re upset because they’re not in it.
Again, if you want a “nice” car at an “affordable” price, there’s Buick for that. If none of that stuff about “lifestyle” makes any sense to you or seems stupid, then you’re not Cadillac’s target demographic anymore.
NewQ, no offense, but people with your attitude give a very bad name to success and affluence. You clearly do think you are somehow “better” than others, and I feel sorry for those you encounter, including those limited few that you believe are your equals. You sound like the worst caricature of Marie Antoinette. You are entitled to your views, but the USA was not built on class snobbery like yours. And frankly I think attitudes like yours are dangerous to freedom, including free markets, as they play into the hands of the socialists. Free market capitalism has served Americans very well, but people with your attitude fuel resentment toward not only you, but the system itself.
I happen to like well-made, well-equipped cars with the features I enjoy, and in the past that has meant Cadillac. If everyone owned a car as nice as mine, I’d be happy for them, not upset that my car was no longer my “status symbol”. IMO there’s nothing wrong with appreciating quality products, but feeling “entitled” and sneering at hard-working people (e.g. Bubba’s Caddy Barn, $29 meal in Flint Michigan, etc.) disregards your own humanity and could ultimately be dangerous for our society; just saying.
Luxury is really two classes right now for the average buyer. the value luxury that is Hyundai, Lincoln, Lexus, Acura, Buick and The like.
Then there is the higher class luxury that comes at a price and that is all the higher brands. As to the car and image it just depends on what you want to spend. Even these brands are bridging over to the lower end now like Audi with some cheaper models. etc. There are some variation with each as there are no hard fast rules.
My point with Cadillac has been they do not need to bridge as GM has Buick in that gap.
Second Cadillac does not need to beat anyone volume wise. Cars like Chevy and Ford are volume cars at a lower price and when you spend more for a car you are paying for more exclusive. How exclusive you want to be depends on how much you want to spend.
These cars are more toy than transportation. The fact is no one needs a car like this these are cars that peoples images are represented by and their dreams are built on. The fact is we all could get by in life just fine with a Spark but few people want that image nor dream.
Look at who buy these cars. High rollers that want to be seen as successful. They roll up to a business lunch and if they are in a expensive car it shows they are successful. Other s are not successful but they want the image and often spend more on the car than the home they live in. there is always the smaller segments that like the technology and performance too. But the fact is image sells here and the better the image the more you can ask for the right of this.
As for the 8-6-4 and other things. GM has always had great technology but in the 1970-2005 era they often rushed it to market and created issues by doing it with the lack of needed technology or just at too low of a cost.
Then they took Cadillac and made them cheaper and unchanged with where the market was going. The fact was they were building floaty cars when less and less wanted them. The kind of cars the Germans built were what the market wanted not that they are so much German cars.
The Germans got it while others failed to change with the market.
in the 70’s the small little cars were seen as cheap Japan imports and today that small efficient cars are where the market is. They are not seen as regional anymore and that is the same here.
Here is the deal.
Many mistake Cadillac for tying to be a German Luxury car. The truth is they are aiming to be a Luxury car that the market wants. Just because they handle better and they have more power does not make them a German copy as the market drives the direction what what the market is. Just because the German brans are the ones that followed the trend the best and fulfilled what the market wanted still does not make what the segment a German segment,
Now there are some cheaper brands that have done German copies right down to the styling. I do not see Cadillac doing this.
Today Cadillac is trying to fill the segment with cars that are what people want with true Cadillac styling and not trying to look but anything but a Cadillac.
As for numbers vs names. The Germans got that from the American Luxury brands when they were the leaders years ago. If you bought a Cadillac in the teens to the 40’s you bought a model number not a name.
The bottom line here is non of us have seen the future yet as for what JDN has planned. As it is the head of Cadillac and staff has been a revolving door. I expect improvement just because of stable leadership for one. How well will the improvement go well that is up for the market to decide.
Like I am have clearly stated we need to let JDN present his models and then let the market decide how he is doing. For us to judge now is like being critical over a meal that we have not eaten yet. He may fail horribly but until he does we can prove nothing.
Also do not expect major victories over night. It will take several models to move the needle. Just one model and good or bad will not make or break the future for Cadillac. Image is like a brick building built on many models over several layers.
The idea here is Cadillac is no longer a Volume brand outside the SUV models.
Hence the need for a dealer on ever corner hurts the dealers in general. All sell few cars and make even less money.
Now you do like most luxury brands and offer dealers only in large metro regional areas and then the dealers become much stronger and profitable. Stronger and profitable dealers will be better able to afford better service and facilities.
If you note now most luxury brands have one dealer per average size metro area and larger ones may have a couple.
Then the really high end may have only one or two per state.
If you have many dealers competing then you end up with dealers fighting over less cars to sell and pricing drops to where no one makes money.
Even over at Chevy GM has too many dealers. Just compare an average metro area and the number of Chevy stores vs. Honda and Toyota.
The deal is GM moves less cars today than they did years ago. When you move less cars it is less for dealers and many suffer and offer poorer service and less amenities because they just can not afford it. That leads to a weaker network of dealers.
GM would like to leave a dealer network in a even spread out of the country focused on the larger regional metro areas and just have less over lap.
The dealers in the small towns that over lap others are the ones at risk.
All I might add is if my dealership closed, which I’m sure it won’t, that action alone would allow me to expand the scope of vehicles for consideration to Mercedes, Audi, and BMW, since the next closest Cadillac dealership is beyond the distance I will travel for sales or service.
Sadly, my dealership’s service/experience is several notches beyond the quality of vehicles they are being asked to sell!
if they want to be Amarecan luxury again…..they have to get rid of the slab-sided profile and stop making the seats so stiff and hard.
I agree that the seats have gotten way too stiff and hard (along with the suspension), but I happen to like the Cadillac profile. It’s unique and still very American/Cadillac. Though at some point it will get long in the tooth and some changes will need to be made. I think that’s still several years off though.
The market will determine what is offered. If people want sofa’s again they will get them if they want buckets they will remain.
The market will for sure evolve but it will never go back to the floaty ride and over stuffed bench seats. Seats could get softer and rides smoother with active suspensions but technology will move to the new norm.
Scott3, I agree that bench seats are never coming back, nor should they. Softer seats and a floaty-er ride make so much sense though, especially as the population of the US continues to age. And appreciation for a plush ride is not limited to older people. This “race to the hardest ride” has not made a lot of sense, and I believe the tide will turn against it soon.
What’s funny though is that I’ve read comments on a BMW blog, where a BMW owner was complaining about the hard ride of his car and wanted to know what could be done about it. One commenter asked him if it were his first BMW, stating they all ride hard like that. Another owner said he didn’t like the hard ride, but assumed that was the price to be paid for owning a BMW. A couple of more said that if he wanted a cushy ride, he should get a Cadillac! Obviously those people were thinking of the old “Cadillac ride”, not the current one, or what JDN is aiming for in the future.
What is sad to me is that Cadillac spent all that time establishing that they had the best ride (in terms of comfort), and now they’ve trashed it. They could be selling it right now, if they had it. It’s missed sales, just like the missed sales with the Escalade that they couldn’t produce enough to meet demand. If Cadillac ever goes back to the historic “Cadillac ride”, they’ll have to re-establish it in the minds of the public, all over again. All because they chased BMW sales that never materialized (or at least haven’t done so yet, and probably never will). Of course maybe some day BMW will change and offer plush riding cars, and maybe JDN will say “Yeah, we should do that too!”.
Cadillac has been hanging on to that slab-sided profile for 15 years now and it’s already long in the tooth and vary watered down……we could expect an all- new design theme in the next 7-9 years.
I don’t agree with everything Cadillac is doing, but it boils down to 1 thing for me. I want a Cadillac, and I could not have been less interested 10 years ago. With the prices hitting the stratosphere I may end up with a CPO, but I want a Cadillac.
Cadillac needs fewer modals and just a few high quality modals…..not 12 cheap, overlapping. modals
Completely wrong. That will not drive volume or more importantly profits.
The Cadillac lineup is not in line with current tastes and demand (read crossover intensive). Mercedes has 6 crossovers/SUV and BMW has 5. Cadillac currently has only 2. Sedans are not currently not the in thing. Until Cadillac changes their product mix sales volume increases will be hard to come by.
GM is a morally bankrupt company.
Their business ethics are lacking.
They truly have lost their way.
Huh?
Why is GM any more morally bankrupt than any other multibillion dollar multinational Fortune 500 company?
Just a hunch, but I’m guessing $75m is a modest estimate … I’d take the ‘over’ on the over/under.
Still, it has to be done.
automakers need to find a way to make luxury car seats cushy again….in today’s Caddys the seats look and feel like they belong in a Chevy….I find that disappointing.
The head guy DN is a night strong and smart individual.
I am very confident in what he is doing.
I’m 22 years old and i think every thing he is doing is what needs to be done.
Especially this buyout. Get rid of dealers who offer cheap experiences for the wealthy.
The naming system doesn’t really matter to me considering all the models will be practically new. The only name worth keeping is the escalade. I think if your going to be introducing as many models as he is you need more simple too.
The move to new York? Genius. The vibes and environment your around SHAPE who you are.
The new styling with escala? Had to happen. I think it’s cleaner and cleaner is good. But I think everyone can have their own opinion on this. But I also think you should wait to judge till production models come out.
But people will always complain for these litter reasons but the more I see the more I know this guy is brilliant.
Think what you will. There is a reason why you and I are typing on this forum and he is growing a billion dollar brand.
This is a great move.
It might be painful, but as long as the Cadillac name is being peddled by “Bubba’s Caddy Barn” somewhere in rural Iowa, it’s going to tarnish the brand. Speaking strictly in terms of developing a world-class brand image, these dealers have to go, or at least stop selling Cadillacs. Make them Buick dealers, or whatever, but if you have salespeople trying to bring in customers by saying things like “This here’s basically the best DeVille we got”, it’s not going to cut it.
If anyone thinks the XTS or CT6 is as good as the S-Class or 7-Series, they should not be allowed to work in a Cadillac dealership. If they understand that they’re not as good, and that they’re priced accordingly, and they represent a legitimate value proposition for a certain range of customer, that’s okay.
No, Cadillac doesn’t want people who have “bought American for 50 years, nothin’ like a Brougham d’Elegance! Don’t wanna overpay for those imports!” Sorry, that’s not a Cadillac thing, that’s a market demographic thing regardless of product. You need young rich people to want your products, not old people who think $40 K is a lot to spend on a flagship, and don’t even know enough about fine details to understand why those things make competitor cars better. Those are the people who think a XTS is equivalent to an S-Class, and they’re not the kind of customer Cadillac wants or needs.
NewQ, based on your numerous comments here – it’s hard to tell if you are trolling us, or if you are really the snobby little twit you are pretending to be. If it’s the former, congratulations, that’s excellent parody. If it’s the latter, I feel sorry for the people who encounter you in everyday life. You seem to imagine that there’s such a large market of young, snooty, status-oriented “I want it all” rich kids, that Cadillac should drop everything and cater to these arrogant little brats. I doubt your proposed market is large enough to be worth serving, considering the fixed costs of developing, testing, tooling, and manufacturing each car. BUT if Cadillac does take your suggested approach and aims strictly for that 1% of the 1% to the exclusion of all else, then it looks like Lincoln is going to have a booming business in the future.
It sounds snobby, it sounds elitist, and it sounds arrogant, I completely understand that. I agree with you in some ways, but I’m also dead serious, and not trying to troll anyone.
All of these conversations seem to revolve around a disdain for a certain segment of the luxury market. It only relates to Cadillac because that’s where the automaker is aiming for now.
I’m not suggesting Cadillac aim for the 0.1%, that’s Rolls-Royce territory. But they can comfortably aim for the 10%-5%, and yes it is to the exclusion of all else. That’s how luxury works, the “value” proposition (if that word even makes sense here) is a combination of many things, including a better product, a better image, a more sophisticated overall experience, and the fact that other people can’t afford it.
That’s why luxury brands can charge 3+ times more for something that only offers 5% better functionality. Does a Mont Blanc pen write much better than a Bic? No. Does it have gold, diamonds, and precious woods? Yes, that will be $600 please. If that product differentiation makes no sense to you, then you’re not in the market Cadillac is aiming for.
Luxury cars are the same way. The profit margins are much larger on luxury cars, and the volume is much lower. Cadillac can only command the price that yields those profit margins by getting people with enough money to by their products. And to do that, every part of buying and owning a Cadillac has to feel special, better, and different from buying a mass-market car. That’s a large part of how these customers make their decisions.
I understand it feels like Cadillac is leaving people behind and saying “so long, your money’s no good here!”. But that’s not a Cadillac thing, that’s a luxury market segmentation thing. It strikes me as illuminating that so many people upset at Cadillac’s new direction don’t even understand this market or know these customers exist. That alone signifies that Cadillac has been playing to the wrong crowd for the type of brand they want to be.
Plus, for the “all else” that is being “excluded” by Cadillac’s new brand strategy, there’s Buick.
NewQ, thanks for explaining your views, I will take them at face value. You and I disagree on what Cadillac’s strategy should be, that’s fine. In the end, this is a business. I think Cadillac would make more profit overall following my favored strategy. Sure, ultra-expensive cars have the highest gross margins, but when you add in the development/tooling costs they often lose money.
You apparently think Cadillac would make the most money following your preferred strategy, very high profit margin per car, very low volume. Or else you just want Cadillac to cater to you personally, and you don’t really care whether or not they make an overall profit (or much of one). We’ll see how this plays out, but I not only feel that Cadillac is not going the direction I would prefer personally, but they will not perform very profitably as a brand, the way they are going. Time will tell.
I do think Lincoln must be loving the way Cadillac is headed, hoping to take a huge portion of business that would have gone to Cadillac. Hopefully Lincoln can hire some of Cadillac’s former designers and engineers, especially as JDN takes Cadillac away from the edgy designs and makes it more and more of a Euro-clone. Lincoln used to copy Cadillac, maybe now they can hire former Cadillac people and become the real deal – the true American luxury leader. Sorry but Buick does not fill Cadillac’s former role. GM appears to be conceding a massive market to Lincoln/Ford, in a quixotic pursuit of BMW. Sad to see it, but that’s life.
Traditional American luxury is hard to find these days. Though, many carmakers are starting to lean that way as it turns out. BMW owners have complained for years how their cars are becoming “softer”, but that’s what the market wants.
I myself enjoy a comfortable car. I don’t want an M or an AMG, I want refinement, elegance, and luxury. A soft ride is fine for me, as long as it doesn’t heave and ho like the barges from the 70s. Quietness is also of prime importance. Quiet smooth engine, no road noise, no tire noise.
Of equal importance though, is build quality, material quality, technology, and attention to detail. The S-Class and 7-Series, up through the Rolls-Royce Phantom and Bentley Mulsanne, are perfect cars for my tastes in this regard.
If anything, Cadillac isn’t trying enter a new market segment, it’s trying to return to one. All of the upper-class, super-rich, snooty people everyone on here seems to hate, those WERE the people who used to buy Cadillacs from the 20s-60s. They were the CEOs’ car. They were so nice, a doctor couldn’t make a house call in one, for fear of being seen as too expensive.
In the late 70s, through the 80s, and the 90s, Cadillac started chasing volume and got complacent and their quality went down, and so did their price.
People liked to think they had finally made it and they had risen to a point where they could afford a Cadillac, but the opposite was true. Cadillac had lowered their market reach to meet them. More people weren’t suddenly rich, Cadillacs were suddenly cheaper. Fast forward twenty-five years, and the flagship sedan costs $40,000 and was perfectly suited to that price point, while the S-Class and 7-Series were double that and justifying it as well.
I would love for Cadillac to return to the tip top of the market and compete with Mercedes and BMW, and maybe even Rolls-Royce and Bentley one day. Why can that not happen? Why not aim for the top? Cadillac has been there before.
Again NewQ thank you for getting what is really going on and what happened.
Too many live in the past or are just now pissed off that they just found out they are not really the kind of customer Cadillac is chasing anymore.
Cadillac can challenge the top cars again but they have to earn their way with cars that are compelling and best in class no matter what the class is.
There is no easy path to the top as it has to be earned. Just because you build a Bentley challenger but you need to earn the trust of people before you can expect them to buy one. If you can not earn their trust with a $ 70K car you will not earn it with a $250K car.
Just ask a XLRV owner that paid $105K for the car new and now can not unload it for $30K.
Building image and customer trust is a time consuming thing. Also it takes money and continued investment. This is where this is all going. It took a couple decades to piss away the trust and Image Cadillac once had and it will not return in a couple years with a couple new models either.
I wish more understood this.
Also Luxury is not what it was in the 50s-90s anymore. Times have changed just as there were no Duel Cowl’ed phaetons in the 60’s.
The fact is Luxury has been redefined today and some folks need to follow the changes.
The all else is not by default Buick–the market has many cars in that class offered by almost all manufacturers.
Many of those all elsers will be leaving GM and taking with them the profit of those sales! And as GM needs to understand, many will not be back!
“You seem to imagine that there’s such a large market of young, snooty, status-oriented “I want it all” rich kids, that Cadillac should drop everything and cater to these arrogant little brats.”
Because such a market exists RIGHT NOW. It exists in America and everywhere else on Earth where Cadillac is sold. How do you think BMW and Mercedes rode to the top in the 80’s? It wasn’t on them simply being German.
BMW and Mercedes saw the young urban professionals (YUPPIES, remember them?) with their great big wads of disposable income, marketed their cars as status symbols to display their wealth, and the rest is history. They’re still doing it today, albeit with more competitors, but it’s printing them money every day.
If only Cadillac could get on board with it and not cater exclusively to geriatrics and the middle class who saved money for 20 years just to get a piece.
Sad, but it’s true. I’ve come from a working class family and I used to see it just as you do now, but even I can see how the system works today. You can work hard for a lifetime and get the Cadillac when you’re 65, or you can become a professional while you’re still young and enjoy life.
That’s why YOLO became popular. If you want to enjoy the best, you better do it while you still can, not when you’re 65.
Grawdaddy wrote: “If only Cadillac could get on board with it and not cater exclusively to geriatrics and the middle class who saved money for 20 years just to get a piece.”
So you think Cadillac is catering “exclusively” to geriatrics and middle class who saved money for 20 years? The ATS-V with it’s RWD, tight steering, race-car engine, and 33.5″ rear seat – that’s for geriatrics and the like? Same for the other ATS iterations, the CTS sedans, the XT5 SUV – those ALL cater to the older folk? Hmmm, I didn’t realize.
I’m actually a so-called “professional”, and I’ve long been able to afford most any care I want, even an M-B S-Class or even a Bentley. That’s not how I choose to spend my money, but I could easily swing it if I had the desire for it. I’m glad I don’t have the attitude of NewQ – I’d have no problem buying a Cadillac alongside those “plebian” Chevy buyers. I’ve never felt above someone because of their financial circumstances.
People are people, and I’d like to see everyone have nice things to enjoy, a nice life. I like having the nice car, the nice house, and the nice life that I have – but not because I have them and a lot other people don’t. I honestly don’t understand the “I have this expensive thing and you don’t, and that makes me feel good that you don’t have it” mentality. I’d like it if everyone could afford a real, full sized, nice riding Cadillac (not a Cadillac in badge only, like the Cimarron). If Cadillac could make such an awesome car, wouldn’t it be great if more people could enjoy it, rather than fewer? But I guess that’s a minority opinion here.
“People are people, and I’d like to see everyone have nice things to enjoy, a nice life.”
“If Cadillac could make such an awesome car, wouldn’t it be great if more people could enjoy it, rather than fewer?”
And you swing right into socialism, after you made such a big song and dance about how awful it was to America, you’re secretly wishing Cadillac was freely available to the everyman at an affordable price. Good job, hypocrite.
Cadillac is not populist. Cadillac, just like every other luxury automaker, is deliberately exclusionary and exclusive. It’s chasing after those who are status seeking, not those who are stagnant and retiring.
Grawdad, are you serious? You obviously don’t know what socialism is. I’m not in favor of the government handing out Cadillacs to everyone at taxpayer cost. But if we lived in a world where everyone could work and afford a Cadillac, a real Cadillac, that would be great. People do earn a lot more money on average than they used to, and one nice result of that has been that a lot more people can afford really great cars. When I grew up, electric windows were a very rare luxury (Cadillacs had them, not much else). Now nearly every car has them, and that’s great. I don’t care about keeping something good exclusively to myself, as long as everyone is earning what they have. That’s the promise of capitalism (not socialism) and it works. So if I earn myself and my family a nice car, nice house, nice swimming pool, nice tv, stereo, travel, etc. – then I’m happy if everyone else can work and earn the exact same nice things that I and my family have. What’s wrong with hoping everyone can be successful? What pleasure would I get from seeing someone in the gutter?
And what sort of pleasure do you get from having something nice that no one else has? How does keeping others from having it make you feel good? If you like Coca-Cola, does it taste better to you if only you can have it, and no one else? Or might you be glad that everyone can enjoy something so nice? Today, most everyone can afford Coca-Cola when they want it. And they can buy it from their own earnings, no one has to hand it to them. Does that bother you?
You are the strange person here – someone who apparently gets pleasure from the absence of pleasure for others. As I said before, if Cadillac creates a great car, what’s wrong if everyone can work and afford it? What’s next with you? Would you happily blot out the sunshine for most other people, so that you can “exclusively” enjoy it with your select little clique? You can’t just enjoy the sunshine for what it is, and be happy when other people can enjoy it too?
You say you want “status”? Ok, so why don’t you just walk around with a sign on your head that tells everyone how much money you make? That will give you all the status you want, and yet you won’t feel the need to be “exclusive” with the nice things in the world. Everyone will look at the sign on your head and think “Wow, he is so cool!”. I know I would (not).
You must be some bitter little guy, or have self-esteem issues for some reason. You want to have something “exclusive” to make up for something that’s lacking in you. When I think of the people I’ve known who own Corvette Stingrays, most of them are old guys, over 70. The only guy I knew who owned one in his 20’s (almost 30) was about 5’6 and an outright jerk. He apparently thought having a Stingray would help him attract women. Guess what – it didn’t work for him. Probably not because he was 5’6 but because he was a jerk. Enjoy your “status” Grawdad, obviously it means everything to you. Hopefully you’ll never find out the truth – that no one else cares about your “status”.
You’re still getting it wrong with your populist, socialist thinking.
“If you like Coca-Cola, does it taste better to you if only you can have it, and no one else? Or might you be glad that everyone can enjoy something so nice? Today, most everyone can afford Coca-Cola when they want it. And they can buy it from their own earnings, no one has to hand it to them. Does that bother you?”
You’re comparing Cadillac to a soft drink when you should be comparing Cadillac to 25 year old single malt Scotch. Anyone can get a Coke, and anyone can see how simple and ordinary it is. That is not what Cadillac is for; it is not something freely available to everyone.
Quarter century single malts are expensive because they taste otherworldly. They take 25 years of aging in a barrel to make, and their global demand is at an all time high. Exactly the kind of thing Cadillac should want: low production and high demand of a luxury product.
The sugar-water called Coke can be churned out of some factory somewhere with a million cans in an afternoon, the demand is seasonal, it’s loaded with carbs, and it’s an inferior substitute for scotch. This cannot be Cadillac. This can be Chevrolet, but never Cadillac.
You simply don’t get it. You can’t ask for Cadillac to be freely available to the masses without it being populist and as a function of a socialist state. It, like single malt scotch, is a luxury because it’s hard to get and price in a way that prevents it from becoming a commodity. With this comes social status and clout, something that comes automatically when you buy a luxury product.
Furthermore, I know what socialism is. My country has been socialist for almost 90 years and we’re doing just fine. Get off your high horse and stop pretending that an economic system is equatable with a social policy. They aren’t relateable, and it certainly hasn’t been a ruinous disaster for the nation.
Think of that next time you go a liquor store. Spring for something better than simply being a cheapskate who never lived a day in his life. Leave the populist beer on the shelf and get something from Islay. For once in your life you’d be able to taste a small luxury rather than save money for decades only to do a line-drive hit that lands you into a Buick.
You get it and it is refreshing to see.
The whole point is JDN came in and knows that the cars are not as good as they could and should be. Also they know you can not discount your way to the top.
The 400 dealers getting cut sold less than 50 cars each and all together only accounted for 9% of all sales. These guys are not doing well and serve no help to Cadillac or even themselves.
The money in the market is going to the German makes by default. People perceive them as the best and that is where they go.
The fact is Cadillac needs to cater to those with means to buy not just the retired people at the Boca Vista retirement community. {Jerry you like the Astronaut pen} The one that Seinfeld mocked Cadillac with in a episode years ago?
Automakers learned long ago to earn image you have to make a car something that not everyone can own. Porsche learned this in the 80’s when they sold many cheaper models and nearly killed the brand. AMF did it to Harley in the 70’s with cheaper discounted prices. Today FCA has killed the 300 profits and image with the ability for people to discount them to nearly $30K.
Some folks are upset as they are no longer Cadillac material. That has been the problem as they should never have been Cadillac material.
At one time if you owned a Cadillac in the 20’s-mid 50’s you were someone. Today just about anyone can buy one and they were sold in such great numbers the resale left them in the hands of people in Trailer Parks.
This is what killed the image and it is not a formula to earn a worthy image back.
As it is now Benz has flirted with the cheaper models with some great risk as has BMW. In the case of Cadillac they do not need to worry about this as GM has Buick to fill that slot.
No one needs a Cadillac but you have to create an aura that makes them want one.
One only has to ask What does a Cadillac have to offer someone who can afford one that is better than the Benz and BMW that garner the money now?
We should see JDN stuff in 2019 and on and then we can pass judgment but even then change like this takes years.
BMW was seen as the odd guy at the end of the street that drove with a tweed cap kind of car. It took them about 10 years from 1975-1985 to really arrive as a status symbol or seen as worthy of the price in the market.