Entry Level Luxury Performance Sedans

Mr_Shiftright

Bob Lutz is not anyone from whom I would take serious advice.

benjaminh said:

Maximum Bob's words are to be taken with a grain of salt, imho.

No way do I think the long-term reliability of all makes is essentially similar this point. Wishful thinking.

qbrozen

I think some of what he said made sense, though. My takeaway was that he feels today's pay structure in automotive should favor the designer above all else. All of the efforts by the CEOs and CFOs pale in comparison to the effects the designers have on sales.

I don't necessarily agree that they matter MORE ... because what is a beautiful car in an otherwise failing company? Fisker, anyone? But I think his point that they are near the top of the importance scale, and should be compensated accordingly, is a pretty good one.

dino001

Bob Lutz was a part of the spineless management of the old GM and even today he still wouldn't take any responsibility. I saw him on Kudlow couple of years ago, asked why didn't GM change its ways before. He responded that UAWs strike fund would outlast their cash pile. I was truly disappointed when Kudlow didn't follow up with "And whose fault was that?". GM was still paying a dividend, big bonuses, spending money left and right. They should have stopped the dividend, start hoarding money well in advance of a planned contract renewal to the point that they could outlast the Union - just like literally everybody else in the machinery business did in 80s and 90s. Some actually went bankrupt (Cummins), others went into long strike (Caterpillar), until they broke the power of their union. But that would have been uncomfortable. Perhaps even bonuses wouldn't be paid, as self-set artificial sales goals wouldn't have been met, the stock would have been down for a while. Who wants that, if you can pretend that nothing is wrong, do couple of faces to the cameras, like you are fighting those unions, then sign whatever they bring you and collect the bonus for a "great job".

As far as I'm concerned, Lutz has zero credibility, even if what he says may be correct.

markcincinnati

Cadillac's push to raise the price of the CTS to -- I assume -- 5-series territory is not based on a bad theory, it is just that it was [obviously] too early. A CTS at a 3-series price probably could have/should have continued for a bit longer. Those wanting a CTS/5-series sized car were, I think, heading to Cadillac for "premium+value" -- isn't this what Lexus did from day-one?

Now, a buyer with a 3-series budget goes into the Cadillac showroom, thinking he/she might drive out with a CTS and gets a bit of a shock upon seeing the MSRP of the CTS. I imagine the buyer isn't interested in an ATS after his plans to drive off in an American 5-series for a 3-series price have been dashed.

I would also imagine the unintended consequences of the CTS being priced at 5-series levels would be the buyer just goes ahead and gets a 3-series or perhaps finds a "Summer of Audi" lease deal that is too good to pass up.

I think the CTS, at the same price as a 5-series, is, today, too much wishful thinking on the part of De Nysschen and his marketing team.

The market isn't ready, yet, to accept a CTS priced like a 5-series.

Pity.

And, whoever wrote about my purchasing proclivities is dead-on: While I would not pay nearly $10,000 more for an A7 when I could have an identically equipped A6 for less, I would gladly pony up the $10,000 for optional extras like leather, electronics, wheels/tires and other factory-exclusive customization. Of course, I'd probably wrap it in a pure white colored car, since I also have an issue paying $1,075 for some off-beat blue color option, but would pay for B&O speakers in a heartbeat.

I remain: Often wrong, never uncertain.

dino001

Agreed - CTS price move should have taken several increments, not one big leap. Hubris? Miscalculation? I wonder if they asked anybody who isn't their relative or on their payroll. To me even a 12-year-old kid could have told them it was a bad idea. Those corporate echo chambers are just like cable news shows - everybody nodding and reinforcing each other how smart they all are (which is obvious, as they all agree). Then the reality strikes - elections for one, or sales of others. Brilliant theories fall apart - but of course, nobody admits to anything, they all have ready twenty-five excuses, why people who voted against them didn't really mean it, or why people who bought something else were somehow duped.

qbrozen

I wonder if it would have been any different had they simply named the ATS the new CTS and come up with a different name for what is now the CTS. Of course, then people would be up in arms that the CTS shrunk. Oh well.

markcincinnati

I think, too, there is merit in the observation that Cadillac doesn't have enough CUV's to compete with the likes of Audi and BMW. And, despite my own rejection of the notion of buying an X6 when I could have an even better equipped X5 were I to spend X6 money, well, BMW has the X1,X3,X4,X5 & X6 and some "M" variations to spice things up even more. Cadillac has what, an Escalade?

Were I in charge, I think I would -- for a while -- go for the "land-grab" approach to market share. I am certain that is exactly what Lexus did when they came out with a car that lured Mercedes shoppers into the showroom and had these shoppers test drive a Lexus that essentially did everything a Mercedes did but for some 20% less money. Today, I believe the big Merc and the big Lexus cars sell for similar sums and it is accepted.

My friend always bought 7-series, for a long long long time; eventually he bought an LS400 (or whatever the 7-series sized car from Lexus was/is), bought another one after that, too. I ran into him taking delivery of an Audi A8L recently. My how times have changed.

I assume he might, someday, consider a Cadillac -- but for the kind of money that this list of cars has cost him over the years, I have to assume he wouldn't consider any Cadillac worth some number beginning with an 8.

Bad as things are for Cadillac, imagine the uphill battle Lincoln faces.

Yikes!

benjaminh

markcincinnati said:

....Bad as things are for Cadillac, imagine the uphill battle Lincoln faces.

Yikes!

Actually, Lincoln is now making a come back. Sales were up a solid 21% for Lincoln in July. They had their best July sales of the last 10 years. Lincoln is a "value" luxury brand. If they keep it up, and Caddy continues their misguided free fall, they might someday trade places in the sales rankings. This is actually a big opportunity for Lincoln for "conquest" sales from their long-time competitor.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/ford-posts-best-july-u-131500694.html;_ylt=A0LEVvzIBsFVkSsAoiYnnIlQ;_ylu=X3oDMTByMjB0aG5zBGNvbG8DYmYxBHBvcwMxBHZ0aWQDBHNlYwNzYw--

roadburner

As I've said before, Cadillac should have taken the Lexus route and priced their cars on the low side and only raise prices as the cars gained exposure and accolades.

markcincinnati

Wonder if De Nysschen sometimes looks back at leaving Audi and thinks to himself, "What in the wide-wide world of sports was I thinking?" He was with Audi for 19 years and things were going along swimmingly weren't they?

I don't know what he possibly could have done in the short time he was with Infiniti, and I guess he did want to live in New York, but he better work some magic on Cadillac -- soon.

Perhaps the phrase is, "if anyone can, he can."

Time will tell.

sweendogy

for those talking caddy and messing with pricing you are spot on - the ELR is a perfect example of it- car is a rebadged Chevy and is 70k - I would bet I will never see another one 

dino001

Well, there is probably a decent separation between ELR and Volt in terms of almost everything, but motor. However, it still does not get you to 70 grand.

benjaminh

markcincinnati said:

Wonder if De Nysschen sometimes looks back at leaving Audi and thinks to himself, "What in the wide-wide world of sports was I thinking?" He was with Audi for 19 years and things were going along swimmingly weren't they?

I don't know what he possibly could have done in the short time he was with Infiniti, and I guess he did want to live in New York, but he better work some magic on Cadillac -- soon.

Perhaps the phrase is, "if anyone can, he can."

Time will tell.

My guess is that he was thinking that he was about the get the biggest payday of his life. I bet he's making several times what he used to make at Audi.

I'm sure he really believes in what he's doing, misguided though it may be. And he'll be rich enough that he'll never need to work another day in his life—even as he drives Cadillac into the ditch.

I think in 1-3 years GM might well get rid of him with a golden parachute. But by that time the damage will have been done....

andres3

benjaminh said:

Maximum Bob's words are to be taken with a grain of salt, imho.

No way do I think the long-term reliability of all makes is essentially similar this point. Wishful thinking.

I whole heartedly agree. Anyone who has ever had a car where reliability and durability caused great and frequent concern will always be very concerned with reliability and durability.

For instance, you might only pay $37K for a Focus RS in the near future, but would reliability woes end up costing you more than you'd pay for a $50K German car in the long run? My math says it is possible; if you value your time.

andres3

benjaminh said:

markcincinnati said:

The ATS sales are particularly disappointing.

The new boss of Cadillac seems close to crazy to me. He thinks he can charge prices above BMW? Caddy seems to be in free fall. Sad. Although that has seemingly allowed a make I like better, Acura, to pass Cadillac, which I never thought I'd see....

http://www.modernreaders.com/why-pay-500-a-month-to-lease-a-cadillac-when-you-can-pay-less-for-a-bmw/29485/lorenzo-tanos

"Cadillac Boss De Nysschen Sticks to Guns with High Lease Prices

Cadillac President Johan de Nysschen, a.k.a. the architect of what many hope would be the luxury brand’s grand comeback, hasn’t had it easy at times. Most recently, he was scored by several dealers in New York who want him to make Cadillacs cheaper by offering more affordable leases and rebates.

If you ask de Nysschen, the main thing is to “do what’s right for the brand,” and doing what’s right doesn’t include cheapening a premium brand. But is it still the right thing to do when Cadillac sales are down 1.5 percent for the first half of 2015, while the luxury space continues to surge in popularity? Consider that Caddy’s international rivals – Audi, BMW, Lexus, and Mercedes-Benz – all enjoyed 7 percent growth or better in the same period. Once again, Cadillac is the outlier in its class, and de Nysschen may need to do more. For one, Cadillac has just one crossover despite the popularity of the class, and both the CTS sedan and ATS coupe are suffering in the sales race.

One tool Cadillac can use to turn things around, dealers contend, is to offer cheaper leases for its vehicles. In a Bloomberg special report, Potamkin Cadillac (Manhattan) general manager John Bruno related that the CTS once cost under $400 per month to lease. But now, leases are worth over $500 a month, or over 20 percent more expensive, and more expensive than what one would pay to lease a comparable BMW...."

The reason the leases are expensive is because you have a high inflated MSRP selling price joining the reality of how much they are actually worth at the end of the lease. Someone has to pay for that, in the past it has been tax payers, but most think another bailout won't be granted, so you can't rely on that anymore.

dino001

andres3 said:

benjaminh said:

Maximum Bob's words are to be taken with a grain of salt, imho.

No way do I think the long-term reliability of all makes is essentially similar this point. Wishful thinking.

I whole heartedly agree. Anyone who has ever had a car where reliability and durability caused great and frequent concern will always be very concerned with reliability and durability.

For instance, you might only pay $37K for a Focus RS in the near future, but would reliability woes end up costing you more than you'd pay for a $50K German car in the long run? My math says it is possible; if you value your time.

I wouldn't be so sure that Audi, BMW, or Benz is much more reliable than Focus RS. It might, but it might not.

andres3

dino001 said:

markcincinnati said:

The ATS sales are particularly disappointing.

Nearly negative 40 percent is a disaster, considering that ATS didn't even reach its midcycle upgrade and their initial stated goals for the volumes. ATS was supposed to capture the fallout of CTS sticker shock, but it seems it did no such thing - people simply walked away completely, they didn't get CTS and they didn't get ATS, either.

I wonder if that's just Cadillac's hubris, or a real strategy. For years good old GM was losing money on every car they sold and "making up in volume" , but that "strategy" was a road to bankruptcy. Perhaps they decided to simply acknowledge they can't sell as many cars as before, but through product improvement, they can reach some sustainable level of sales, albeit lower than before. One possibility is, if they are truly capable of having superior product and financially ready to back up lower volumes, they may attempt to hop over Germans, who are going in an opposite direction, by making their brand more accessible. How difficult is that? Extremely. Even if they can make a product that beats the Germans, the logistical problems are multifold - their dealer network is too big for the lower volumes of "exlusive brand", they would have to let go many (which costs money in broken contracts namethey will need to shutter or repurpose plants (which costs money) and the risk is the downward spiral may still continue (people see sales falling so they don't wont to join the "losers" club). The previous GM had completely gutless management and militant unions, which made any real downsizing impossible. Not sure if the current one can pull it off - perhaps they can. The road to brand rebuild is long and twisted.

Cadillac has been a "volume premium" brand for many decades now. It was "super rich" brand only at its inception. By the time around 50s -60s it was a car not just for a millionaire, but also for the local dentist and lawyer. It meant higher prices than popular cars, but low enough so every midsize town could have a Cadillac dealership. It's not like Jaguar, where they always were a niche player with small network, except failed rebadge Ford Mondeo experiment. Today they seem content with small market segment with very expensive product. Cadillac is simply too big for that. They need volumes. I think it's basically a failure from the sales point of view, even if the products (CTS and ATS) are best they have ever been.

I think a big mistake was made keeping the Cadillac/GM names/brands around. They should have renamed and re-badged everything to try and get a cleaner slate from previously burned buyers. They should have followed the example set by GMAC, which became ALLY and they didn't exactly advertise the fact. Change your name, don't use any letters from your previous name (OK; Ally uses the A in GMAC; vowels will be forgiven). So think up a name that doesn't have the letters "GM" or "Cdllc" in it!

andres3

dino001 said:

andres3 said:

benjaminh said:

Maximum Bob's words are to be taken with a grain of salt, imho.

No way do I think the long-term reliability of all makes is essentially similar this point. Wishful thinking.

I whole heartedly agree. Anyone who has ever had a car where reliability and durability caused great and frequent concern will always be very concerned with reliability and durability.

For instance, you might only pay $37K for a Focus RS in the near future, but would reliability woes end up costing you more than you'd pay for a $50K German car in the long run? My math says it is possible; if you value your time.

I wouldn't be so sure that Audi, BMW, or Benz is much more reliable than Focus RS. It might, but it might not.

I agree, if Ford is smart, they'll ensure the Focus RS is reliable and durable. If they don't give a damn, well, anything is possible. I guess my main point is I'd be worried (and I think others out there too) about the reliability and support of a nearly $40K Ford whereas with Audi they've already gained my trust, and others probably feel the same way given Audi's recent growth. I'd probably be worried about it with Benz too, a bit less so with BMW. Part of the reason is BMW offers free maintenance for a long time. The other part is I see a lot of BMW's at HPDE sessions/events and they don't seem to require tow trucks or early retirements during the weekend.

benjaminh

Over at vtec.net iutodd has compiled a list of luxury sales for the year so far:

Mercedes: 208K
BMW: 195K
Lexus: 188K
Buick: 127K
Audi: 111K
Acura: 102K
Caddy: 95K
Infiniti: 74K
Lincoln: 56K
Land Rover: 37K
Volvo: 35K
Porsche: 29K
Jag: 9K
Maserati: 6K
Bentley: 1500
Alfa Romeo: 368

circlew

Well, GM knows not how to use pricing in their favor for cars...for trucks, yes. They really aren't a car company anymore and Caddy is the proof they really struggle with that lost "standard".

Mr_Shiftright

The only thing going into a ditch in the immediate future will be a number of Cadillac dealers. Heads are going to roll pretty soon I think.

sweendogy

Looking at the numbs above Buick jumps off the charts a bit- with that being said remember when gm cut the brand - lost Pontiac and 2 other brands that sucked. Ford sacked Mercury, Christler the worst of the bunch got rid of Plymouth and struggled only to be sold for pennies. The anticipation of a potential slowdown ... The problems with unions... The financial crisis bout to happen ... The end of the good old giveaways at dealerships. gM has to smarten up. Slice a brand or 2 if needed....toyota prob will beat them to the punch again

tlong

andres3 said:

I think a big mistake was made keeping the Cadillac/GM names/brands around. They should have renamed and re-badged everything to try and get a cleaner slate from previously burned buyers. They should have followed the example set by GMAC, which became ALLY and they didn't exactly advertise the fact. Change your name, don't use any letters from your previous name (OK; Ally uses the A in GMAC; vowels will be forgiven). So think up a name that doesn't have the letters "GM" or "Cdllc" in it!

Absolutely and I said this in these forums during the BK. The GM fans would still have bought the newly renamed GM, and the GM non-fans would be MUCH more likely to buy a vehicle from a revamped company that wasn't named GM. Remember Valujet? They renamed to AirTran and became quite successful until bought by Southwest, in spite of a bad crash and maintenance problems. The name change wiped a lot of the memory away.

tlong

andres3 said:

dino001 said:

andres3 said:

benjaminh said:

Maximum Bob's words are to be taken with a grain of salt, imho.

No way do I think the long-term reliability of all makes is essentially similar this point. Wishful thinking.

I whole heartedly agree. Anyone who has ever had a car where reliability and durability caused great and frequent concern will always be very concerned with reliability and durability.

For instance, you might only pay $37K for a Focus RS in the near future, but would reliability woes end up costing you more than you'd pay for a $50K German car in the long run? My math says it is possible; if you value your time.

I wouldn't be so sure that Audi, BMW, or Benz is much more reliable than Focus RS. It might, but it might not.

I agree, if Ford is smart, they'll ensure the Focus RS is reliable and durable. If they don't give a damn, well, anything is possible. I guess my main point is I'd be worried (and I think others out there too) about the reliability and support of a nearly $40K Ford whereas with Audi they've already gained my trust, and others probably feel the same way given Audi's recent growth. I'd probably be worried about it with Benz too, a bit less so with BMW. Part of the reason is BMW offers free maintenance for a long time. The other part is I see a lot of BMW's at HPDE sessions/events and they don't seem to require tow trucks or early retirements during the weekend.

It's not just reliablity, it is also parts costs and dealer costs. While Ford's reliability has been pretty poor lately, even a more reliable German car could easily cost more, especially if you are out of your warranty period.

benjaminh

Mr_Shiftright said:

The only thing going into a ditch in the immediate future will be a number of Cadillac dealers. Heads are going to roll pretty soon I think.

Yes. It seems like some Cadillac dealers are literally begging for mercy. And it seems like they're not getting any. I imagine that low volume dealers in smaller cities have helped enlarge Cadillac's overall numbers for decades. But now management might look down at those dealers, which might not be glitzy, and might not have customers who can pay prices higher than BMW's for today's Caddys.

roadburner

dino001 said:

I wouldn't be so sure that Audi, BMW, or Benz is much more reliable than Focus RS. It might, but it might not.

Precisely; besides, the RS will only be built in Der Fatherland!!!

circlew

On the 'Heads will Roll" front:

Lincoln’s division has needed a rebound in sales for some time. There have been suggestions that Ford shutter the brand because it has posted such poor numbers. Sport utility vehicles (SUVs) pulled sales higher, as the segment posted an improvement of 21.3% over July of last year to 9,536. Lincoln car sales dropped 3.6% to 3,186. Led by sharp improvements in MKC and MKX sales, SUV numbers were up 39.3% to 6,350.

Cadillac’s drop came despite its management’s forecast that the brand is in the midst of a turnaround. Cadillac sales fell 7.1% in July to 14,154 compared to July of 2014. The numbers would have been far worse if the performance of its SRX crossover were not so strong. Its sales grew by 46.8% to 6,753. The SRX was Cadillac’s top-selling vehicle. Numbers for its cars were abysmal. ATS sales fell 38.5% to 1,588. Sales of its CTS dropped 27.5% to 1,515. Sales of the XTS dropped 32.9% to 1,302. Cadillac management has run out of excuses.

Even with a slowdown in Mercedes and BMW sales, raw numbers show the U.S. luxury brands still lag well behind. At least Lincoln has started to gain some ground.

benjaminh

benjaminh said:

Over at vtec.net iutodd has compiled a list of luxury sales for the year so far:

1. Mercedes: 208K
2. BMW: 195K
3. Lexus: 188K
4. Audi: 111K
5. Acura: 102K
6. Caddy: 95K
7. Infiniti: 74K
8. Lincoln: 56K
9. Land Rover: 37K
10. Volvo: 35K

I wouldn't call Buick a luxury brand. And so, taking it out, here are the top 10 luxury makes in sales this year so far. The top 3 are quite close. I think it's possible any of them could pull out a narrow win for first place. Despite its big successes, it's a long drop to Audi, and then Acura is not far behind.

Caddy seems safe at # 6 for now.

But for a brand that for 70+ years was the undisputed king of luxury sales in America, it's been a dramatic fall over the last 20 years.

benjaminh

This is the fantasy that Johan de Nysschen has sold to GM:

"SHANGHAI (Reuters) - General Motors Co's Cadillac aims to increase its global annual sales to over 500,000 cars by 2020, a senior executive said on Friday.

Cadillac President Johan de Nysschen made the comments at an event in Shanghai.

De Nysschen has set Cadillac on an aggressive new path to challenge BMW and Mercedes in the world of high-end luxury automobiles.

To that end, he has moved marketing and sales operations to New York from Detroit and switched advertising agencies.

GM has also announced that Cadillac will begin to report financials separately from its parent holding company in an effort to bolster its independent luxury identity...."



Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/r-gms-cadillac-aims-to-increase-global-annual-sales-to-over-500000-by-2020-senior-executive-2014-12#ixzz3hx0GqdoQ

markcincinnati

Wow -- well, like they say, "aim for the stars."

For those of me who care about these kind of things -- headline:

"Audi sets 55th straight monthly U.S. record with 20.8% gain in July 2015!"

If we start going back those 55 months, I believe we would come to a period where De Nysschen was at the healm -- the fact that things kept humming along after his departure is, I think, NOT an indication that the top guy doesn't matter, but rather an indication of how the products are perceived by the market.

As I dust off my graduate school marketing textbook (which is probably, by now woefully out of date), all evidence suggests EITHER to raise prices or increase market share by some method that leaves the perception of "big bucks" undamaged.

My leasing guru says: sub-vent the leases like there's no tomorrow, get the current product out and seen by the market; meanwhile work behind the scenes on getting products to the market that people WANT (translation Audi Q3, Q5 and Q7 rivals and BMW X1, X3, X4, X5 and X6 rivals).

If you ax me, the money spent bringing the all electric Caddy to market was a nice idea, but I don't see it as helpful to what ought to be the bread and butter ATS.

Isn't it true that for Audi THE meat and potatoes car is the A4 as the 3 series is for BMW? Shouldn't Cadillac at least consider doing whatever it takes to get "a lot more" ATS's in the hands of customers by almost any method (sub-vented leases being a good tool, typically)?

Or is it that the cars themselves just aren't "gettin' it done?" So no matter what you do within reason, some people will still say "The Emperor Has no Clothes."

One last random thought, the Audi dealer I shop is owned by a group that also owns a Cadillac dealership a couple blocks away -- so naturally, we do tend to browse that dealership since they know my wife and me as long time loyal "dealer group" customers. I have priced cars at the dealership and they are as stubborn as can be about the price they will use to run the numbers, whereas the Audi group seems willing to put the best deal on the table first. The experience at the Audi dealership is what I call horizontal sales, due to the fact that the sales staff is so laid back you have to wake them to get them to sell you the car; the Cadillac dealership still seems to employ a technique from yesteryear, with salesreps dressed in clothes one size too small and largely lacking in product knowledge beyond what they can glean just by looking at the sticker.

The approach at the Cadillac dealership is, well, disappointing, even as the cars are getting somewhat more interesting and competitive.

Just an observation -- a data point that may or may not be an outlier.

nyccarguy

@circlew - How is everything going with your Q50S?  Infiniti definitely gives you a lot of car for the money.  The Q50 AWD base model checks off a lot of boxes for me - 328hp V6, AWD, Automatic, mid 5 second 0 - 60 mph time, heated steering wheel, LED headlamps, rear view camera, sub $40K MSRP, no sunroof.  I think you have to step up to the Q50 Premium to get heated front seats.

Mr_Shiftright

Cadillac is going to have to excel in the entry level luxury segment--traditional Cadillac buyers are simply not responding to Cadillacs high end price structure. Cadillac is hoping they will "in time" but how much time does Cadillac have?

tlong

benjaminh said:

This is the fantasy that Johan de Nysschen has sold to GM:

...

To that end, he has moved marketing and sales operations to New York from Detroit and switched advertising agencies.
...

It's going to take a lot more than a new advertising agency to help Cadillac. IMHO the brand, like GM and Chevrolet, is tainted by a lot of history. They should rebrand themselves completely.

markcincinnati

Crazy Miranda (Jefferson Airplane)

OK, so I read several posts that essentially dismiss Bob Lutz's opinions, essentially just stating that we shouldn't put much stock in Mr. Lutz's perspective.

I would be the first to agree that critical thinking is appropriate, and that we shouldn't all turn into Crazy Miranda's or even just accept so and so at their word, "because."

But what is it about Lutz's column that sparked the vitriol? Generally speaking, his remarks while certainly at least somewhat debate worthy, didn't seem to be "crazy."

He did retire some 5 years ago but as recently as a late 2014 Washington Post article/interview, he certainly appears to command more than a patronizing amount of respect.

Was/is "your" dismissal of his comments based on merit or based on some belief that Lutz doesn't know what he's talking about?

I would certainly agree with him that KIA is doing one helluva job at design -- but, of course, that much is totally subjective and for every compliment one could dig up, there would undoubtedly be a barb decrying KIA's designs as totally uninspired and derivative.

Just wondering why the animosity toward Lutz?

circlew

nyccarguy - Q50 has been outstanding so far. I like the infotainment and not too difficult to use after a few weeks. Can't figure why heated seats don't come standard in the base model, though. The S has brought me the sport suspension/brakes even though AWD and the sport mode tightens up the trans shifts quite nicely. I chose the non-DAS steering. Very nice package for $455/month lease, indeed. Love the blip-throttle downshift, also.

I used the eco-mode for about 10 miles!

dino001

"But what is it about Lutz's column that sparked the vitriol? "

Lutz was part of the upper management team that run GM to the ground and he never admitted to anything. He keeps talking from a position of the industry expert, but on any inquiries about his role in the GM's demise he has gazillion excuses, or acts like nothing really happened.

nyccarguy

circlew said:

nyccarguy - Q50 has been outstanding so far. I like the infotainment and not too difficult to use after a few weeks. Can't figure why heated seats don't come standard in the base model, though. The S has brought me the sport suspension/brakes even though AWD and the sport mode tightens up the trans shifts quite nicely. I chose the non-DAS steering. Very nice package for $455/month lease, indeed. Love the blip-throttle downshift, also.

I used the eco-mode for about 10 miles!

I love the way the Q50 S looks with those 19" wheels and lip spoiler. However, the higher trim package coupled with the absolutely horrendous road conditions here in the North East would steer me towards the base model. I follow the "lease questions" board here and am amazed at how cheap these cars lease for compared to their MSRP.

circlew

I agree the lease deals are great on the Q. I originally shopped a used G37S RWD but before I could blink, it was gone! Hard to find in stock RWD S models here in NJ.

I give a little ride comfort for the extra cornering anyday. We just wear mouth guards on the side roads!

My wife has a CX-9 and it's absolutely wonderful when the road bends with the 20" shoes (given it's weight). The ride suffers but she loves it! She let's me drive it sometimes!

tlong

markcincinnati said:

Crazy Miranda (Jefferson Airplane)

Was/is "your" dismissal of his comments based on merit or based on some belief that Lutz doesn't know what he's talking about?...

Just wondering why the animosity toward Lutz?

I can chime in here. Two things - he was part of the GM failed management team and was always making excuses for their mediocre-to-shoddy vehicles.

And he laughed off the Prius and hybrids in general, even though a few years later GM was scrambling with THREE different types of hybrids that were all going to save the world

- the "mild" hybrid (I think all of those are discontinued now),
- the "two-mode hybrid" (I think all of those are also discontinued now),
- the Volt (not discontinued, but selling nowhere near original projections.

...and also wasn't he the designing force between those great successes the Solstice and Sky?

Seems that he is more hot air than any real merit.

Mr_Shiftright

Lutz sometimes says things that display an incredible level of ignorance. Inasmuch as he can't possible be a stupid man, I have to assume his ignorance is willful, and he simply doesn't want to know the facts behind what he says at times.

dino001 said:

"But what is it about Lutz's column that sparked the vitriol? "

Lutz was part of the upper management team that run GM to the ground and he never admitted to anything. He keeps talking from a position of the industry expert, but on any inquiries about his role in the GM's demise he has gazillion excuses, or acts like nothing really happened.

tlong

Mr_Shiftright said:

Lutz sometimes says things that display an incredible level of ignorance. Inasmuch as he can't possible be a stupid man, I have to assume his ignorance is willful, and he simply doesn't want to know the facts behind what he says at times.

dino001 said:

"But what is it about Lutz's column that sparked the vitriol? "

Lutz was part of the upper management team that run GM to the ground and he never admitted to anything. He keeps talking from a position of the industry expert, but on any inquiries about his role in the GM's demise he has gazillion excuses, or acts like nothing really happened.

Perhaps he's not as bright as you are giving him credit?

Mr_Shiftright

I can't really say. I know in politics one can go far without high intelligence, but you must have a superior kind of rat-like cunning to survive. So maybe that's it.

markcincinnati

Wow, I wonder why he gets his own column (as in don't they know?) and why he seems to be quoted so often. I had really almost no idea of who he was/is, but his style is somewhat Donald Trump-like.

I do like his column, but it seems he perhaps should be taken with a grain.

Mr_Shiftright

He says really good things and really dumb things. He's a hip-shooter, so it's bound to come out badly now and then. Probably his worst gaffe was to challenge Dr. Neil deGrasse Tyson on climate change on national TV. His argument was that climate change was a complete hoax and isn't happening at all because he owns a house in the Florida Keys and it's not underwater.

Yeah Bob...okaaaay......

I did like his quote about the government trying to achieve better fuel economy by forcing industry to build smaller cars, which he likened to trying to make Americans less fat by issuing them smaller sized clothing. That was pretty clever.

circlew

That was pretty clever.

He should have been more clever when at GM.

graphicguy

Personally, I like Bob Lutz. His Book...CAR GUYS VS BEAN COUNTERS is probably one of the top 10 business books I've ever read. Lessons there for other companies outside the auto industry. I tend to read his columns and listen to his interviews.

He's an ego maniac, without a doubt. And, sometimes I scratch my head at some of what he says. But, I think he's 83 now. And, as such, most people I know that are entering or are in that age range pretty much don't care what others think. So, they say whatever pops in their head.

I'll forgive some of that based on giving due respect. Overall, he's a pretty bright guy.

He sort of painted his time at GM as him against the big car establishment. Not sure how much is true and how much is bluster. But, he got the company to take chances (i.e. "new" GTO, Solstice and Sky....too bad they were products of failed divisions). He derided the Aztec. He tried to move GM. Wasn't entirely successful, but is willing to admit he wasn't, too.

Colleague bought a new IS 350 F Sport. I've always liked those. I test drove one a year or so ago. If anything, I like them more after seeing his (darkish grey with red leather interior). Hard to fault the build of it....probably the best I've seen. Still, a little cramped. Maybe that's because I've been used to driving cars a bit bigger than the IS. Seats are wonderful. Just a very, very nice car that goes well, drives well, and is built extremely well. His MSRP sticker said $49K....quite loaded up. He said they discounted his by about $2,500. Pretty good value for $46.5K. Hard to say that about a Lexus.

benjaminh

Another story on Cadillac:

http://www.autonews.com/article/20150807/RETAIL/150809864/cadillac-works-to-revise-dealer-incentives


Mike Colias RSS feed
Automotive News
August 7, 2015 - 1:54 pm ET
ELKHART LAKE, Wis. -- Two main elements of Johan de Nysschen’s plan to rehabilitate Cadillac’s image are to tighten dealers’ inventories and quash their sell-at-any-cost mentality.

There’s a big problem though: Cadillac’s dealer-incentive programs today are designed to do just the opposite. One makes cash payouts for growing sales; the other attaches up to $700 in dealer bonus money to every vehicle they order from the factory.

De Nysschen, Cadillac’s president, says those programs must change for dealers to adopt a true luxury mindset, one based on an engaging customer experience, rather than sales volume.

“The business model has been structured more for the bigger brands inside General Motors, rather than the small Cadillac brand,” de Nysschen said here at a test drive event for the media. “The luxury business is different.”

He said Cadillac is in talks with its national dealer council “to develop the next generation of what these programs should look like for Cadillac.”

It’s an example of the obstacles de Nysschen faces in reshaping Cadillac’s retail network into something that more closely resembles those of German luxury brands such as BMW or Audi. Most of Cadillac’s more than 900 dealerships are hard-wired to carry far more inventory than other luxury stores, often moving the metal through deep discounts.

A Midwest Cadillac dealer, who didn’t want to be identified discussing factory business, believes it would be difficult for many dealers to fathom an incentive program that’s not tied to sales performance.

“There’s only one thing that matters, and it’s selling more cars,” said the dealer, who said he sells a couple dozen Cadillacs a month. “I did not come in here today to buy more digital stuff for the showroom.”

(more at the link)

dino001

He makes sense, but only if they close more than half of the dealers and limit the production. They'll run him from town first. Too many vested interest. No chance. This is a ten year program with constituance having patience for a couple of quarters.

roadburner

For the most part, the typical Cadillac dealer is simply not prepared to sell cars to customers that still have all their own teeth...

dino001

It's not about the age, it's about customer experience philosophy. My feels is Cadillac's dealers are mentally closer to Toyota's, Vokswagen's than to Lexus's, or Audi's. Part of that is the past, part is the financial structure and the way they are are compensated by the parent company.