Cadillac has announced it has a new chief marketing officer in Deborah Wahl. She replaces former CMO Uwe Ellinghaus, who resigned last December over health issues.
Wahl was formerly the CMO at McDonald’s for three years, but she also served as CMO and vice president at Chrysler, and vice president of marketing at Lexus. Additionally, she previously held multiple marketing and communications positions at Ford.
“Deborah’s diverse experience, as well as her proven track record of building successful global brands, makes her a natural addition to our leadership team,” said Cadillac President Johan de Nysschen. “Cadillac has made incredible progress over the past several years in our long-term journey to regain our position as the pinnacle of premium luxury brands. Deborah’s experience and strategic vision will build on that progress and help propel Cadillac forward during our next phase of global growth.”
Now, her task will be to build the Cadillac brand and she steps into her new role at a critical time. Cadillac will kick off its product offensive this fall when the 2019 XT4 crossover launches. Then, the brand will launch a new Cadillac every six months for a total of five new crossovers and sedans forthcoming. Each new vehicle will need major support from the marketing department if Cadillac hopes to truly pull off a successful rebranding campaign.
Wahl’s appointment will be effective March 26 and she will report directly to de Nysschen at Cadillac’s New York City headquarters.
Comments
I’m very surprised it’s not Renee Rauchut, after she did such a great job with the new Cadillac commercials. But at least Ms. Wahl is not only an American but a Detroit native, so she comes from a culture that appreciates what Cadillac means to Americans. That’s a big change from Uwe as well as Johan.
Drew I think you are just a bit too hard on Johan sometimes. Don’t get me wrong, I think the UWE and Melody should have absolutely no place in the Cadillac team, but honestly, I think we have to give Johan a shot. You and I agree on many things, but I think you have to lighten up a bit when it comes to Johan, I mean he did “introduce” the Vertical DRLs and he did keep the XTS around….. maybe hes not such a bad guy.
Henry, understood – you make some good points about JdN. I just don’t think he has the background to run Cadillac. He didn’t grow up with Cadillac in his home market, and his background is as a marketing guy, not an engineer. Also his keeping Uwe (until he had health problems) and Melody shows a lack of judgment as a manager. Further I think it’s wrong for a premium brand to sell cheap base versions with weak engines, vinyl seats, halogen headlamps, etc. And I happen to disagree with his stated intention to turn all Cadillacs (at some point in the future) into “driver’s cars” (i.e. sports as well as luxury in every vehicle.
If it were up to me, I wouldn’t “give Johan a shot” because I feel his background and stated intentions are likely to lead to failure at Cadillac (or continue the failure that began when Cadillac dropped its own values in favor of German imitation, starting in the 1980’s). I’d prefer to “give a shot” to someone who is more likely to succeed. But it’s his game now, for whatever reason it has fallen into his lap. So I’ll agree with you in the sense that only the future will tell the final tale regarding JdN’s impact on Cadillac. We just have to wait and see, even if some of us have a very good idea of how this will play out.
All of the current models were released or in development before JDN had a chance to make changes. While I agree with your statement about Cadillac not using Chevy Cruz parts he is just getting a chance to flex his muscles with the XT4 and beyond.
Cadillac needs to appeal to a younger audience and I suspect Barra & Co agree
Kyle, yes those cars were in development. But JdN has been in charge for 3 1/2 years now. He could have at least made minor changes to the base trim offerings of the current model year, such as nixing the vinyl seats and halogen headlamps on the base ATS and CTS.
“A culture that appreciates what Cadillac means to Americans”?
You mean like all the lefty, anti-American socialist university professors and other elitists who would never be caught dead in an in “American vehicle” because overpaying for a Mercedes, BMW or Toyota is just so much more “intellectual”?
Worth, no I meant the Cadillac that was #1 in the US luxury sector for good reason, for five decades straight following WWII. Someone from Detroit should appreciate that more than a former Audi person from South Africa. The people you’ve described will never consider Cadillac or any other American brand, so there’s no point trying to please them by trying to imitate the Germans or advertising at the Oscars. Cadillac needs people who appreciate Cadillac’s proud history, and unfortunately that doesn’t happen in countries where they don’t have Cadillacs – i.e. South Africa.
Obama pushed for TARP for GM
In 2008, Trump said that GM and Chrysler should be left to die.
Just last week, Trump issued the death-warrant for American manufactured products that use metal. As in, just about every product produced in America.
But, Worth Repeating, your super-intelligence can just deny those lefty-facts, right?
Old Trombone, I didn’t vote for Trump and I don’t like “protectionist” tariffs. However, Obama did not save GM. The original GM shareholders were wiped out. As were the Chrysler shareholders. In other words, GM and Chrysler DID die. Yes the brands live on, but that likely would have been the case even with a proper bankruptcy. Look at the major airlines such as United, American, Delta – each one of them has gone through a proper bankruptcy without government help. Yet the brands and routes live on.
Obama used TARP – which was set up to prop up the banking system, not the car manufacturers – essentially to save the unions a large slice of the new pie at GM and Chrysler, once they were recapitalized. The original shareholders were wiped out, and the bondholders got cheated in the deal. It was definitely leftist, but not free market capitalism. And based on the airline model, not necessary.
The tariff situation is tricky, because China puts its own tariffs on various imports, including imported cars. It’s been discussed on this forum several times that China charges massive tariffs on cars made in the USA. They will allow cars to be made in China without the tariff, but that does not help US manufacturing jobs.
Meanwhile China has a massive overcapacity in steel, and they dump this on other countries, which in turn dump China’s or their own steel on the USA. While this is to the benefit of the US consumer of steel (including manufacturing that uses steel), it’s bad for US steel manufacturing and presents a challenge to national defense. Even so I am against the proposed Trump tariffs, but if the threat of those tariffs results in better trade deals with lower tariffs all around, then that’s a good thing.
“Worth Repeating” is correct that in general, American liberals will not consider buying American-branded cars. There are exceptions of course.
American liberals won’t buy American cars. Joe Biden’s Corvette was secretly built in Baikonur. By the same folks who reverse engineered that B29 in 1945, reported in detail in Smithsonian Air and Space (look it up). And the Volt and now Bolt are market failures. Right?
Look up “airspacemag soviet TU 4 Made in the ussr”
It’s a B29!
So the brand, workers, and managers live on, but the CEO and share/bond holders were punished for their overexposure to hedged (gambled) short-sales, which as product manufacturers, they should have steered well clear of, which is exactly what Mulally did at Ford. Sounds like the correct outcome to me.
Old Trombone, that is not what happened with the GM and Chrysler bonds at all. The bond holders were entitled to what they could get at an asset sale of the companies, up to the face value of the bonds. By virtually anyone’s measure, they got a small percentage of what they would have received in an asset sale.
Mullally did put Ford on better financial footing than GM and Chrysler, thanks to timely cash-raising which might or might not have been luck, coming ahead of the financial crisis of 2008. While the GM and Chrysler shareholders could fault management for not forseeing the financial crisis and would have been wiped out anyway, it was Obama’s misuse of TARP that hit the bondholders the hardest. Like it or not, Obama misused TARP to cheat the GM and Chrysler bondholders in a left-wing government transfer of wealth from one group (the bondholders) to a more politically-favored one (the unions).
One of these “leftist” Americans who drove Euro cars is BOB LUTZ, Marine Fighter Pilot and defender of America against Commies. Bob got a job at BMW and invented M. He used his international experience to make GM products better once he got home. Bob Lutz understands that non-Americans aren’t automatically anti-Americans. It’s worth repeating that you want Cadillac to stay livery, just like the old days…
I hadn’t heart that Bob Lutz was a leftist. I’m not sure where you are getting this. He hates capitalism and he’s now hanging out with Raul Castro, Kim Jong Un, and Nicolas Maduro? BTW, Lutz moved to the USA when he was 7 years old, and became a US citizen at age 11. Beyond age 7 he grew up living in the US except for going to high school in Switzerland. He was back in the US for college and served in the US military. That’s plenty of time for him to get an appreciation of American cars.
The point isn’t that non-Americans are anti-American, I wouldn’t say that at all. The point is that if you grow from childhood to adulthood in a country where they don’t have Cadillacs, such as Johan and Uwe, and your relatives have no connection with the USA as well, then you can’t fully appreciate what the Cadillac brand means to Americans. Especially when you add onto that, working your first 20 or so years at a German car company, as did Johan and Uwe. But it doesn’t make you anti-American, again – where are you getting this?
I am not anti-Korean, but I don’t think I’d be the right person to take over the top kimchi brand in Korea, since I didn’t grow up with it. How hard is it for you to understand this concept?
I didn’t say he was leftist either, that’s why I used quotes. WR said anyone who drove non-American cars was leftist. Therefore, WR said Bob Lutz was leftist. I’m saying, if you can read it this way, that Bob Lutz is PROOF that driving non-American cars is not NECESSARILY leftist. As you know, proof is fact and facts are left. Can you see the problem now?
Old Trombone wrote: “I didn’t say he was leftist either, that’s why I used quotes. WR said anyone who drove non-American cars was leftist. Therefore, WR said Bob Lutz was leftist.”
Clearly the academic exercise of logic is not your strong suit, despite your use of “syllogisms” in another post. What “WR” wrote was about left-wing professors and other elitists not wanting to be “caught dead” in American cars. In other words, if taken literally, with some interpretation (regarding “caught dead”) WR was saying “Left-wing college professors don’t buy American cars”. He also seems to be calling left-wing college professors anti-American.
So his thesis seems to be:
1. Left wing college professors don’t like American cars.
2. Left wing college professors are anti-American.
3. “Other elites” are essentially the same as left-wing professors.
Your conclusion for this is:
1. “WR” is saying anyone who owns a non-American car is anti-American and left wing.
2. Bob Lutz owned a non-American car, therefore “WR” is saying Bob Lutz is anti-American and left-wing.
But WR is simply making a statement about left-wingers, not about the entirety of foreign-car owners. Your flow of logic is similar to: Rats like cheese. Therefore anything that likes cheese is a rat. Sorry but that’s just wrong.
“What the Cadillac brand has meant to Americans” for the last 30 years is Livery. If you want proof, look at how Smith and Wagoner treated it. Barra knows that getting Caddy out of its ‘livery’ is gonna take thinking that comes out of left field. That’s where JDN comes from. Left field, not left politics.
Not considering yourself as Kim Chi CEO makes you anti-Drew, not NOT anti-Korean. You need to work on your syllogisms. As of right now, you are clearly anti-Aristotle.
OT, are you as big an idiot as you pretend to be? Or just screwing around here for laughs?
I said that I don’t think non-Americans have the background to successfully run Cadillac. You decided that this meant I was calling all non-Americans anti-American. That’s illogical on your part.
Then when I say that I’m not the right person to run an established kimchi brand in Korea, you say that doesn’t prove I’m not anti-Korean. And I never said it did prove this. My not being anti-Korean merely shows that I can think someone is not qualified for a job in another country, without being anti- that country. It can’t be that hard for you to follow simple logic, can it?
But if you were just trolling us, good luck with that. I don’t understand why some people do that, but it obviously exists.
If a non-American can’t be Chief of Cadillac because they can’t understand American culture, then why did Alfred P Sloan send Americans to be chief of Holden, chief of Opel, chief of Vauxhall, chief of operations in Brazil, etc etc, and then, to write so PROUDLY about that in the opening words of his book “My Years At General Motors”?
Vauxhall became part of GM in 1925, Opel part of GM in 1929, Holden in 1931. Yes those brands existed in a minor way before they were part of GM, but GM essentially grew them to what they became. And as far as I know, those brands have never resonated in their markets to nearly the degree that Cadillac has resonated with the American public, in songs, movies, and in the culture itself. Even the latest Hollywood anti-American leftist film given the “best picture” features Cadillac prominently, in case you missed that.
GM putting an American into a minor brand owned, operated, and grown by GM itself is nothing like bringing in a non-American to a major American icon, THE major US luxury brand for the better part of the 20th century, and still majority owned by Americans.
It’s not about preserving an American job for an American, it’s a matter of getting people who understand the brand and culture well enough to create the products and marketing to be successful in the American market.
Over the last half-century, American cars in America have depreciated at significantly higher rates than non-American cars, (except the Yugo, of course). If lefties have been avoiding this depreciation, therefore, they have been taking Personal Responsibility for their own finances. Isn’t that Rightie? Your argument seems to be that Rightie Americans have been literally donating their money to American brands, for no benefit to themselves. American brands haven’t had to work hard and improve to earn that money. Doesn’t that make American brands into socialist parasites?
OT, first of all – if you take out the Japanese brands, foreign cars depreciate at least as fast as American cars. And Johan is trying to imitate the Germans, not the Japanese. German luxury cars depreciate very quickly.
Also – no one is saying that all foreign cars are owned by “lefties”. While it’s true that left-leaning voters are less likely to buy American cars than foreign cars, there are exceptions to each.
Everyone should buy the car that they want, based on their needs, desires, resale value, whatever reasons they choose. The point of WR though is that the people he described as leftist professors WOULD NOT EVEN CONSIDER buying an American car. That’s even if research showed that the right car for them, in terms of what they wanted, the price they would pay, depreciation, reliability, etc. would have otherwise had them buying an American car.
Now there was a time when American brands got fat and happy, having the US market to themselves, and consumers suffered. Foreign competition forced American cars to improve, offer more value for the money, etc. No one is saying otherwise. The free market works, free trade works. But if some socialist professor decides he’ll NEVER buy an American car under any circumstances, he’s the one locking himself into a potentially bad deal for himself, not the person who is open to buying American cars.
Overpaying for a Toyota? Did anyone ever do that? Oh, maybe you did, WR?
Overpaying for a BMW? Given their depreciation rates vs GM dep-rates over the last half century, it looks like BMW buyers weren’t overpaying anyone (except their divorce lawyers).
Overpaying for a MB? Absolutely yes, that’s definitely worth repeating. Since Schrempp decontented the overengineering in the 1990’s, every MB buyer has been a marketed fool.
1 out 3, WR. Not good enough.
They should have kept Rauchut.
And Detroit? NY is Cadillac’s biggest market.
Cadillac just had some success with the new direction of the Ocscars commercials. Don’t F it up!
Well, it is not really an “Oscar’s commercial” just shown during the event the first time it was aired. The commercial will be everywhere soon and thank God it wasn’t crap like the previous year’s version.
Too bad the Oscar’s is complete self-congratulating garbage and had the lowest ratings this year it ever has. The Hollywood pedophile billboards got more attention than the show did. Time for GM to put its money in more worthwhile events and shows.
So the infamous “Costume Malfunction” definitely was NOT football half-time, nope. It was just self-congratulating clothing, that’s all.
Hopefully the days of being coy have passed and that new Cadillac ads will take a sledgehammer approach as instead of saying the CTS is sporty, tell the world that it’s capable of 200 mph when equipped with the 640 hp LT4 supercharged 6.2L V8.
Oh, man. Best of luck on that one.
She was the CMO of McD’s, and sent them down a path they’re just recovering from. If you remember the animated disaster, ‘Lovin Beats Hatin’, well, that ‘re-launch’ was on her watch.
CEO gets fired, agency gets fired, they take 15 months to focus group whether ‘all day breakfast’ is a good idea…protracted new agency search, then Deb gets bumped.
She was @ Pulte before McD, Chrysler from 2007 before that…short stays.
I hope she doesn’t get in the way of the good that Johan, Renee & their team(s) are doing.
Sorry to be negative, but she doesn’t have a great track record of great marketing, or advertising, or longevity @ her posts.
Best of luck, but not what you’d consider a ‘Dare Greatly’ CMO selection.
So- some of us are just disappointed; let’s hope we’re proven wrong.
Good info there Captain Carl, even if it’s bad news regarding Ms. Wahl. I do remember the “Lovin’ beats Hatin’” disaster at McD’s. I’m also familiar with homebuilder Pulte, and the reign of slick-haired Richard Dugas. If Wahl was part of that, it’s not a strong endorsement of her.
I wonder why Johan chose Wahl over Renee Rauchut, when Rauchut clearly had done such a good job in Uwe’s absence. Gee I hope this decision doesn’t lower my opinion of JdN. Good luck to her anyway.
I wish her luck & hope she’s up to the task.
Good steal.
I’m lovin’ it! Let’s hope not much of the McDonalds marketing vibe gets replicated at Cadillac and Ms. Wahl’s skills go beyond hyping cheap food to the masses. McDonalds is a company going downhill in public perception as fast as Cadillac’s spiral was.
I’ve long said that Cadillac has such immense opportunity at this moment in time to retake what is rightfully theirs. They’ve got the proverbial golden platter in front of them. Mercedes-Benz seemingly wants to hand it back to Cadillac after holding it for 30 years. If only Cadillac has the good sense to know what to do to take it. Ms. Wahl’s role will be critical and let’s hope she understands that re-building the aura of the brand goes way beyond advertising.
Can’t wait to order those CT6-piece chicken McNuggets!