Johan de Nysschen Ousting: The Winners And Losers
Sponsored Links
The sudden news of Cadillac President Johan de Nysschen leaving the company has shadowed over the rest of the news this week, both from GM and the rest of the industry. It might be a while before the dust settles, and many of us are left looking for answers. And while we’re short on answers, there are still some truths emerging from the dust, and who gains from the result of this fallout. Below are our winners and losers.
Winners: Cadillac Dealers
Johan de Nysschen insisted on his vision to improve the Cadillac dealer network to the levels of tier-1 luxury brands from Europe. Known as Project Pinnacle, it was met with well-documented friction from Cadillac franchises across the United States, and exposed a continental divide between the brand’s slick salesmen, and Johan’s ambitions. Only until recently were there any sign of agreements between the two forces. But now with de Nysschen gone, the future of Project Pinnacle seems uncertain, and with that in mind, the dealer body gets to stick to their old ways for the foreseeable future.
Losers: Future Product
One of the qualities of Johan de Nysschen is that he wasn’t afraid to criticize the products he was in charge of. From sharply criticizing the drab instrument panel of the Cadillac ATS, to calling Apple CarPlay “clunky,” to admitting Cadillac’s unbalanced lineup of too many sedans and much-needed crossovers. We found his critiques to be healthy, and pointed to his overarching plans to elevate the brand as a whole. With four years at the helm, it’s safe to say that he (and former product chief Travis Hester) oversaw much of the development of the 2019 Cadillac XT4 crossover, as well as the expected XT6 three-row crossover, a new Escalade SUV, and the impending CT5 sedan. The future products appear to be well in line with what the brand needs to rebound from its slipping sales in the US market. Beyond them, however, we could see a step backward. And with GM’s unwarranted emphasis on electrification, who knows what’s to happen of the charismatic V-Series line.
Winner: Old GM Culture
We have now witnessed a full pendulum swing. Six months ago Cadillac had Uwe Ellinghaus, a German “outsider” from the likes of BMW and Montblanc, helming the marketing department, reporting to de Nysschen. During Uwe’s tenure, the marketing strategy and tone was sharply criticized for either being over-promising, tone-deaf, alienating, or all three. Then Uwe left. Now Johan – another outsider who oversaw a great turnaround of the Audi brand a decade ago, and was working on changing Infiniti before GM wrote a big enough check – “walks out” on “philosophical differences.” Whereafter Johan is hastily replaced by somebody whom “despite many years abroad, remains an avid hockey enthusiast, and has enjoyed returning to the GM Canada Salaried Hockey League,” according to the press release covering the announcement. And they’re teamed with a former McDonalds marketing executive turned brand CMO. This is the leadership now charged with turning Cadillac around? Suddenly the far-reaching perspectives and marketing direction from the German and South African outsiders don’t seem so bad.
Losers: The Customers
See: Cadillac Dealers, Future Product, and Old GM Culture. But hey, at least there’s that fat Escalade discount happening right now as a consolation prize.
Winners: The Nay Sayers
Upon the hiring of Johan de Nysschen four years ago, a lot of curmudgeons of the automotive media machine puffed their chests and decreed that he wouldn’t last. That there would indeed be sudden fallout between him and the rest of GM’s management, because Johan ultimately wouldn’t be able to “fix Cadillac.” The news this week vindicates each and every one of those old hacks. The same goes for any GM employee that didn’t welcome his changes.
Loser: The Cadillac Brand Cachet
The ousting of Johan de Nysschen also means the utter rejection of a strategy structured around elevating the brand. Several readers naively proclaim that the New York move was a bad one. Even though Johan didn’t make the call on that decision, it was a low-risk and necessary move to focus the Cadillac brand around movers and shakers in one of the world’s major hubs in finance and fashion, and did allow the marketing team to focus without the white noise of GM’s corporate silos. It was a positive step towards elevating Cadillac, just as with the launch of any flagship product. The next phase was to have Cadillac establish its own financial independence, but who knows if that’s happening now. The New York image-play could very well be unraveled in the coming months. As could Project Pinnacle. As could various halo vehicle programs. Johan’s persistence in working to restore Cadillac to former midcentury glory felt like a glowing light coming after the directionless darkness of the Bob Ferguson days, and now it’s hard to shake the feeling that things are going to regress.
Are we wrong? discuss in the comment section below.
Sponsored Links
Honestly I have more respect for Buick than Cadillac now
guys: the car companies are rolling over in laughter with our posted comments:
they are treating cars and SUV’S as a stepchild, and their defense non-withstanding, cars and SUV’s have been over-regulated ; i can understand their frustration
however, the suspensions have been wimped out to such a degree you cannot drink a cup of coffee without spilling dut to the ulta-soft suspensions; the manufacturers’ really believe the customers’ do not care about the ride quality; also sheet metal is so thin you can almost tear in your hands!
listen up vendors: current situations will catch up with you: pls offer us stronger optional suspensions and thicker sheet metals so we can drive comfortably and safely
if you think you can fool us you are mistaken
nielr
I’m no fan of the recent XT4. I recently saw a very sharp, not exactly angular but for from bulbous, and couldn’t help but feel that Cadillac needs to be more like Dailmer Benz and less a foriener’s ill conceived notion of what American should be.
Mark Adams was and would be a perfect fit for Cadillac. The last gen Insignia, Astra, and this year’s Tour X prove he has an eye for beautiful global design. Cadillac needs an iconic front facada and Adams is good at leaving an impression, overlooking momentary trends in favor of classic, timeless design.
Just take Caddy off life support and bury it like Olds, Pont.
At this level, the board of directors had to approve, if not initiated his termination. The “wow” factor seems to be missing at Cadillac and when I look at Volvo’s new lineup, I think why can’t Cadillac do that, too.
If anything the timing just wasn’t right when he came to Cadillac. CTS and ATS were already on the market, other models (CT6 and XT5) already planned and engineered before he could have any meaningful impact. The move to New York; okay I get where you’re coming from. The updated nomenclature; I’m still scratching my head about that.
What did GM expect? Go outback, grab a few dozen Equinoxes and rebadge them post-haste and bring to market overnight!!??
Johan de Nysschen used the C-word recently as he said General Motors Board of Directors essentially wanted Cadillac to revert to selling Cimarrons and it’s why JDN was so willing to leave Cadillac; although to GM Board of Director’s side of the argument, Cadillac’s best selling car is the XTS which Cadillac shares with the Chevrolet Impala.
we need Cadillac to bring back big cars; including decent suspensions where each time you run over a small pothole the entire dashboard does not shake
cars are not selling because they are wimps, period
nielr
But the crossovers that are selling are just as much “wimps” as the cars, are they not? They’re the same cars with the same engines… but with a slightly higher ride height and roof.
Alas, the Germans have no issues selling millions of cars with sporty and comfortable suspensions… and the time of the boat-like suspensions and associated driving experiences you speak of are no longer desired by the masses.
SUV’s also ride cheaply due to the too-soft suspensions; i am sure their truck offerings ( suspensions ) are stronger
How much are the manufacturers’ savings? difference can’t be much
we deserve much stronger vehicles ( including sheet metal quality/thickness and therefore safety ) than we getting now
nielr
What exactly are we talking about here? Trucks and SUVs are engineered to tow and haul thousands of pounds. Cars and crossovers are not. They are completely different products for completely different use cases and scenarios. Do you expect a garbage or a dump truck to go form 0-60 mph in 5 seconds and do you expect your average family car to be able to tow a garbage truck?
The vehicles being sold today are the safest and strongest vehicles that have ever been built. The thickness of the sheet metal has nothing to do with it… the determining factors are beneath the sheetmetal in the frame, structure and supporting beams. The sheetmetal is just decorative covering for the purpose of appearance and styling.
What are you not happy with, exactly?
i see accidents where repeatedly cars crumple;,despite the safety features ; if we had steel hoods , bumpers that bump instead of break, etc. i would feel a lot safer my friend
cars used to be much stronger and were able to tow as well
it appears houses , appliances, and almost all other products are tougher today; it also appears cars/SUV’s are the exception nielr
Crumpling sheetmetal during accidents is the whole point; it is part of the strategic approach to greater safety of modern vehicles compared to the ones you’re talking about (from the 50s thu the 70s).
Here’s how modern cars deal with crash impacts to protect passengers:
1. The core structure/cage protects the occupants
2. The sheetmetal is sacrificed, since no amount of sheetmetal would ever truly protect the passenger the way the core structure/cage do
3. Sheetmetal gets out of the way and lets the core/structure do its work (if it didn’t get out of the way, you would have cases of hoods decapitating occupants as they slid back into the passenger compartment)
4. Sheetmetal is cheap and easily replaced. It will still need to be replaced no matter the accident.
Cars today are significantly safer and “tougher” than cars from the past. Have you seen the video here?
http://gmauthority.com/blog/2009/09/iihs-celebrates-50th-anniversary-crashes-malibu-into-bel-air/
its funny you mention the Germans Alex
i have had Escalades, LX 570’s and QX 80’s but not a Mercedes SUV as the largest one is too small for my needs ( Mercedes SUV)
wish one of the German makers would offer one
nielr
The largest Mercedes is too small? The GLS-Class has more room than the regular Escalade and the Lexus LX… the upcoming X7 looks to be right on the money in that regard as well… though I haven’t studied its specs yet.
i did not return for another escalade as it shrunk compared to previous generation
compounding matters i had transmission, GPS and wheel paint problems fyi
nielr
The current Escalade got slightly bigger compared to the previous generation. That was all the rage among some environment groups back in 2014/2015 when it was launching… here are some numbers.
Wheelbase: 130 (current) vs 130 (last-gen) = equal
Length: 203.9 (current) vs 202.5 (last-gen) = current model is longer
Width: 80.5 (current) vs 79.0 (last-gen) = current model is wider
So on two of the three key dimensional metrics, the current model shows slight growth over the previous model.
The GPS and entire infotainment systems were horrible in the last-gen Escalade… no contest there from me.