Is Cadillac's Image Dying and Does Anyone Care?

mediapusher · January 2007

Oh we're very much on topic sir, because it's all relevant. We may have "beaten a dead horse" when it comes to telling G.M. not to make bad cars and embarrass the United States anymore, but they don't seem to be listening, do they?????

And just in case you can't figure it out. The point of our discussions that seem to be off topic to you are, if they want to make Cadillac the "Standard of the World" then they have to stop producing junk and stop marketing it as if it's world class when it isn't, and they know it isn't. A Cadillac Catera doesn't ring world class in people's minds, neither do strange vehicles like the Cadillac SRX or Cadillac DTS (fishtailing nightmare). The previous CTS didn't ring world class in people's minds because of the embarrassing cheap interior and stupid design touches such as attaching the lap seat belt anchor to the seats. Cadillac should have known not to put cheap interior in the CTS in the first place. They would have sold twice as many as they did, if they had put decent interior in the CTS.

A person that drives a BMW 530 (which is what they're trying to compete with) wants the feel (if not actual performance) OF top craftsmanship, nothing less.
----mediapusher
__________________________________
Mr Shiftright wrote:

The topic really is about what GM can do to make Cadillac "the best" or "one of the best" again.

We've already beaten the dead horse about "don't make bad cars anymore", haven't we?

HOw 'bout someone suggests a whole new line up for 2010? What more successful makes or models should Cadillac try to mirror? Should they go upscale, downscale, all across the board? Should they give up something they are making now?

snakeweasel · January 2007

You're joking right?

No I am not,

"So we drove up town just to get the tags
And I headed her right on down main drag
I could hear everybody laughin' for blocks around
But up there at the court house they didn't laugh
'Cause to type it up it took the whole staff
And when they got through the title weighed sixty pounds."

snakeweasel · January 2007

The beating up of the Allante shouldn't get "OLD" to you

No it does get old. Caddy could be building twice the car as any other maker and people will still bring up stuff like the Allante as proof that GM will always build junk. Anytime Toyota, Honda, BMW, MB and the like comes out with a problem immediately after its fixed its ancient history. But id GM did something bad in 10,000 BC it haunts them til the end of time.

snakeweasel · January 2007

What more successful makes or models should Cadillac try to mirror?

No Cadillac shouldn't try to mirror any make or model. If they do everyone will be talking about how its just a cheap imitation of whatever they are trying to mirror. Cadillac should find out what people want and need in a luxury car and build it from the ground up to be better than anyone else.

You don't win races by following someone.

aldw · January 2007

The only one claiming GM is making bad cars is you, none of the critics that have reviewed any of GM's vehicles over the last few years call them junk, only needing improvements, of which GM is doing amply over the last several years and is continuing today. The future product will kick more butt as they come out.

merc1 · January 2007

Well you did misrepresent the horsepower rating.

For the umpteenth time, that was an honest mistake. Again, with the correct numbers it still was a no-contest. My goodness can you get over that.

Your point of view on the Allante seems to be that since it was not designed to out perform the Mercedes SL it was junk. My point of view is that the Allante was designed to be a fuel efficient luxury roadster based on Cadillac's FWD drivetrain.

Exactly, compared to the SL of the day and then the 1990 SL it was just that, junk. You said yourself that the Allante wasn't in the same class as the SL. How many times do I have to keep closing this case? You can apply that excuse about it being an this and that fwd roadster, but Cadillac's claim was that it was an SL beater and it wasn't. Cadillac even guaranteed the Allante's resale value against the SL and they lost their shirt to put it lightly. The car was an utter flop and failure no matter what excuse come up with.

Sales don't mean the car was a good car or anything significant in its segments. Why is it so hard for GM fans to grasp this? The implication that good sales proved it was a good car is just plum ridiculous.

M

mediapusher · January 2007

That's because G.M. does stupid things like putting cheap interior in a car like the CTS. They should know better than to put cheap interior in a car like CTS. It's a Cadillac, isn't it??????

And puhleeeez, don't tell me we're being unfair. I recently rented a 2007 Pontiac G6. What junk..

mediapusher · January 2007

You just said it yourself --- "making improvements". 31 years after they first faced formidable competition and they're still making improvements. That's INEXCUSABLE. GM should be on par with the competition by now. They should have been on par with the competition by 1985 or sooner. And, hmmm cheap interior in a decent car(finally) like the Cadillac CTS. How could they miss that boat? I proved my point, and so did you.

And it's not just me talking "smack" about GM. You obviously haven't read many of the member commentaries and reviews on here
________________________________
aldw wrote:
The only one claiming GM is making bad cars is you, none of the critics that have reviewed any of GM's vehicles over the last few years call them junk, only needing improvements, of which GM is doing amply over the last several years and is continuing today. The future product will kick more butt as they come out.

62vetteefp · January 2007

Just got our SRX. What a high class interior. REAL stitching (you know like string with a needle) along the IP, doors and along the console. Very nice. My wife loves the way the car drives.

The previous interior (and CTS) as has been said before was not cheap. In an effort to offer something that woudl be noticed they did the "art and science" thing. Worked excellent on the outside. However the technical grain on the inside just made it look cheap toy like. FAILURE.

Hopefully some folks who were turned off by the interiors over the last few years will take a look.

snakeweasel · January 2007

And puhleeeez, don't tell me we're being unfair.

No you are being unfair, people like you are extremely quick to forgive any imports but will never let anything a domestic has done die. As someone else just said "none of the critics that have reviewed any of GM's vehicles over the last few years call them junk". But people like you just keep bringing up ancient history.

They should know better than to put cheap interior in a car like CTS.

Well the 5 series that we looked at wasn't much better. Dull and drab is all that comes to mind for that.

gsemike · January 2007

"needing improvements, of which GM is doing amply over the last several years and is continuing today. The future product will kick more butt as they come out."

I swear that every GM apologist must have that tatooed on their bicep. They don't price the cars like they're improving. They price them like they're already world class. How long do they need to get up to snuff? Caddy is the Chicago Cubs of the auto industry with the we'll get em next year crap.

Putting that cheapo interior in the CTS is the equivalent of that guy catching the foul ball. oohh... so close.

sls002 · January 2007

I have a 1990 Cadillac brochure that includes the Allante. No where does the word Mercedes appear, much less SL beater. I think that it was the media that claimed the Allante was an SL beater, or you are claiming that Cadillac claimed the Allante was an SL beater.

The 1990 Allante did have traction control. I would think on icy roads the Allante probably would handle better than an SL, particularly with the stock tires.

If you can't sell something in sufficient numbers to be profitable, what is the point of production? The Mercedes 600 was equally a total flop and failure, in spite of its technical advantages over the Rolls.

sls002 · January 2007

I have looked at a 2007 SRX and I agree the interior is better looking, with more wood trim. I am not sure the "feel" is much different. I think SRX sales have been slow due to more people wanting something bigger like the Escalade.

fintail · January 2007

Flops and failures don't stay in production for almost 20 years, and attract such raves.

Maybe not a success in terms of a raw use of resources, but it was certainly a halo car for MB for some time. I suspect the Allante was meant to be a halo car too...but we all know how that worked out.

Mr_Shiftright · January 2007

remind everyone to please stop the "brand-bashing" and keep the discussion civil and interesting for newcomers.

If we start digging ourselves into a hole, the whole topic becomes pointless.

Of if you feel we are "talked out" here and need to perhaps start a topic with a "new angle", let the regular host of this topic know your concerns.

This topic was intended by the creator of it to be about the future, not the past...at least that's why I joined it.

All the world already knows Cadillac's litany of past and ancient errors, so we're preaching to the choir.
-----------------------------------------------------------

RE: The Mercedes 600 -- I think I can clear this up somewhat, since I was involved with this car while working for Benz.

It was my impression then that Benz had no intention of making this car a serious force in the marketplace. They spent zilch on advertising and marketing. It was, as fintail says "a halo car". I feel pretty certain MB had no intention of making any money or mass producing this car. The idea was to strategically place a few thousand of them into the hands of important visible people. This was not a car for common consumption. Customers included Hugh Hefner, the Duponts, the Mosler Safe people (how ironic) and Chairman Mao!!

We had a file and kept track of every car by VIN number and often had to send an engineer around to fix them...and I do mean often...or send a dealer technical data.

Amazingly, there were a few of them that were sold and never heard from again. No dealer records, no service, no complaints, no warranty....nothing. A few got smashed up by lunatic socialites, etc. and more than a few went to Latin America. Some owners were very unhappy with the cars but even the disgruntled were impressed with it. Most thought it "overly complex"...if they had only lived long enough to see cars today with 70 microprocessors and 3 million lines of computer code!!

In short, Benz was trying to set a new "standard of the world" but not trying to mass produce it.

You might call it the forerunner of the S Class cars and the ultimate future nemesis therefore, of CAdillac and Rolls.

bumpy · January 2007

The 600 was strictly a showcase car, intended to show off the prowess of MB's engineers and bank account; kinda like the NSX or GT-R that way.

Kirstie_H · January 2007

Bingo! And throwing around labels like "import-lover" or "GM apologist" does more to discredit your point of view than it does to support it. Lay off, and let's move on to how Cadillac may become the standard of the world again.

sls002 · January 2007

As I pointed out sometime back, Cadillac never was the "Standard of the World". Cadillac won a Dewar Trophy for "Standardization", something completely different. For reference, look at post #16 :sick:

sls002 · January 2007

Cadillac probably should not have gone FWD in the 80's. Then they spent the 90's trying to convince the magazines that FWD was as good as RWD. On the other hand, then the RWD Fleetwood would probably have continued on as is (as it was to 1996). The advantage now, is that the RWD's are clean sheet designs, so we have the CTS, STS, and SRX sigma platform models. The basic sigma platform is a "sports sedan" vehicle, and not all cars need to be sports sedans. Cadillac needs to do something with the DTS. The CTS will be upgraded for the 2008 model year, the SRX has a new interior for this year, and the STS is probably OK for a short while.

I don't think Cadillac should try for the Rolls market again, like they did with the Eldorado Brougham in the 1950's, or like Mercedes did with the 600. But perhaps something close to the S-class Mercedes is possible, on the sigma platform, if the sigma can accommodate a larger sedan.

lemko · January 2007

I would love to see a DTS that was similar to the S-Class. Something like that most definately would become my next car. I'm trying to hold off buying a Cadillac or Buick until they once again build a nice large RWD sedan.

Mr_Shiftright · January 2007

That's a very good point which I completely forgot about. Going to FWD was probably a marketing error, since all the prestigious cars today are RWD or AWD.

FWD is perceived as somewhat "lower-tier", even though you will occasionally see an "entry level luxury" car with it.

Also FWD requires very careful engineering when you apply too much HP to a chassis.

plekto · January 2007

Of course, if you want a DTS with a S=class ride, just get a Lucerne CXS in all black. The ride/driving experience is very simmilar to an older late 90s S-Class. Is it world-class now? Of course not. But it doesn't cost $70K either like the old Benzes did.

GM is doing a good job, IMO, with emulating Merdcedes' decade-old technology for half the price, much like how Hyundai is emulating Buick's decade-old technology for half the price. The Kia/Hyundai V6 sedans feel *eerily* like the older early 90s Buicks. Now, it's a serious step down from the newest cars like the Camry V6 and so on, but those old GMs with the 3800 were reliable commuters - and decently safe, too. For $15K or so... yeah, the Hyundais are compelling if you want a box to get around.

But, then, so are GM's better offerings. Sure - it's not the newest technology, but it's reliable, works well, and is loads less money. Let's not forget that the new CTS will start at just over 30K, and with incentives, $30K for a base model will be doable. BMW and Lexus... yeah, right. Incentives? Mercedes? Have they ever offered one on a car? You pay $40K.(the CTS is really a 5 series competitor more than it is a 3 series) I know a lot of people who will gladly take 85% the car Lexus or Mercedes is for 2/3-3/4 of the price and half the cost for repairs.

sls002 · January 2007

I think Cadillac expected their FWD Fleetwood to take over the RWD Fleetwood market, so that before the end of the 80's the RWD Fleetwood sedan could be discontinued. But the RWD demand continued so Cadillac refreshed it in the early 90's.

Audi has been FWD, but the top end has usually been the AWD version.

That also was my point about the Allante, being a FWD, keeping with Cadillac's direction at the time, it was not going to be a sports car. Cadillac (or GM) designed the northstar FWD system to handle about 300 lb-ft of torque and 300 horsepower without too much torque steer.

sls002 · January 2007

I think if the DTS is to continue as a big sedan selling about 75,000 or so units annually, then the price tag will have to remain about where it is. This would not be an S-class car.

A Cadillac S-class would have to be much more expensive, and use a very substantial platform, perhaps the sigma. It would have to have a very good interior, as well as enough of the highend tech that make the Lexus LS and Mercedes S-class what they are.

mediapusher · January 2007

Gsemike-

Thank you for your eloquence. Apparently my usual style of writing just flares people's tempers and I wasn't able to explain it in the way that you could. This point needs to come across, because it's time or General Motors to step up to the plate and discontinue it's delusionary ways.
---mediapusher
____________________________________________

"needing improvements, of which GM is doing amply over the last several years and is continuing today. The future product will kick more butt as they come out."

I swear that every GM apologist must have that tatooed on their bicep. They don't price the cars like they're improving. They price them like they're already world class. How long do they need to get up to snuff? Caddy is the Chicago Cubs of the auto industry with the we'll get em next year crap.

Putting that cheapo interior in the CTS is the equivalent of that guy catching the foul ball. oohh... so close.
-Gsemike

mediapusher · January 2007

Snakeweasel-

Apparently you don't understand the English language. When I say cheap, I'm referring to the low quality of the materials. That's what cheap means ---(LOW QUALITY). It does not mean gauche or bland or drab or dull as you seem to think it means. The additional meaning of cheap that comes to mind for many when it comes to G.M. is the definition of contemptible. This also is what cheap means. And it definitely in my and many other's opinion applies to this corporation, based on the way they've embarrassed the United States over the last 30 years, and continue to embarrass the region today

I would also like to add, that based on your response many people like to buy style over substance. That's fine, if that's the way they like to buy cars, but these people are the first to complain that people have stopped buying American origin cars over time. And then when G.M. lays thousands of workers off and closes plants, "rips the plug" from the "socket" of pension funds, etc, because they are not selling the plethora of cars they used to America is annoyingly told they should "Buy American". If buying American means I'm supposed to throw my money down the toilet, no thank you.

And would you please tell me why a G.M. assembly line worker expects to make executive level wages and beyond to put together a car?? ($42+ per hour)

----mediapusher
___________________________________________

They should know better than to put cheap interior in a car like CTS.
____________________________________________
snakeweasel wrote:

Well the 5 series that we looked at wasn't much better. Dull and drab is all that comes to mind for that.

mediapusher · January 2007

sls002-

The Allante's execution screamed ridiculous. It was silly and ridiculous. That's why people still talk about it today.

Another reason the Allante is still talked about today is because people really wanted the idea of the Allante to work out. It was a gorgeous looking car and not only gorgeous, but "smart" looking. They missed some of those "smart" points in the rear exterior design, but at the time it looked as if it was a step in the right direction. AND, the interior was "bangin." (something that hasn't been synonymous with the G.M. name)

---mediapusher

mediapusher · January 2007

Pletko-

When you say incentives are you talking about rebates?

---mediapusher
__________________________________

. BMW and Lexus... yeah, right. Incentives? Mercedes? Have they ever offered one on a car? You pay $40K.
---pletko

gsemike · January 2007

Rebates are used to correct the price of a car to what the market is saying. Why should BMW or Lexus offer rebates when the cars are selling just fine without them?

mediapusher · January 2007

Gsemike-
I totally agree, however I'm not the one that posed the question, I was just wondering if that's what Pletko was referring to.

And we all know about the recent act of desperation G.M. promoted with their employee "Red Tag" event.
----mediapusher
_________________________________________________
Rebates are used to correct the price of a car to what the market is saying. Why should BMW or Lexus offer rebates when the cars are selling just fine without them?
--Gsemike

mediapusher · January 2007

Mr Shiftright-
Isn't your premise of argument of talking about the future of Cadillac somewhat moot? Take a look right now at www.cadillac.com and tell me what you see. There are references of nostalgia all over the place with pictures and references of cars that date back to 1905. In addition, on the front page are the old Cadillacs from the 1970's that belong to certain personalities that they are using to try and sell the Cadillacs they make today. So your premise of argument is quite hypocritical. Other brands of cars don't have to pull references from the distant past in order to try and sell what they offer today

We've already discussed what Cadillac needs to do to become "Standard of the World" Many if not most of us don't know what this phrase means. It's very subjective.

Also the "standard of the world" question might seem kind of silly to people wanting to participate in this blog because if Cadillac wanted to be "Standard of the World" they would have done it by now. And many don't think they ever were, are too young, or can't remember when they were the standard of the world, if they ever were. Obviously they're not concerned with being "Standard of the World" (whatever that means)
----mediapusher

snakeweasel · January 2007

Apparently you don't understand the English language.

I understand it quite well, I have been in 5 series and I have a CTSv the quality in the interiors are not that much different. At least not to those that do not hold your biased viewpoint. Plus it was just plain dull.

I would also like to add, that based on your response many people like to buy style over substance.

People do, I know BMW owners that can't meet someone new without the words "my BMW mechanic" coming out of there mouths before the night ends.

Funny thing one of them asked about my "Cadillac mechanic" to which I responded "I don't need one".

I know someone else who always drive a C-class Benz who after boasting about it would ask me "how is life with your Hyundia" To which I responded "How is life in your parents house". Actually that response made him stop making his comment.

If buying American means I'm supposed to throw my money down the toilet, no thank you.

Actually I would think that buying a car that need constant work on it (regardless of the quality of them interior) is throwing money down the drain. I would rather drive a car with a not so nice interior that sees a mechanic every other year than one that has a much nicer interior that sees a mechanic every other month.

And would you please tell me why a G.M. assembly line worker expects to make executive level wages and beyond to put together a car??

Well they do it every day, my last GM car went well over 325K miles on the original engine and tranny before it died so I guess they are doing something right.

snakeweasel · January 2007

Sorry its talked about today so that GM bashers can still bash GM. I guess that means that there is nothing you can go after GM today for.

grbeck · January 2007

mediapusher: Other brands of cars don't have to pull references from the distant past in order to try and sell what they offer today.

Mercedes has used older models in advertisements, and the company has even offered restoration services to help enthusiasts keep older models on the road (Car & Driver even wrote a story on the company's effort in this regard).

There's nothing wrong with a company using its heritage to sell new cars, especially when the competition (i.e., Lexus) doesn't have much of one.

The problem comes when the new vehicles don't live up to the promise or heritage of the old ones.

mediapusher · January 2007

Snakeweasel-

Ok fine, let's assume G.M's Cadillac vehicles are a good buy today, , the problem is you like many others expect people to instantly forget the unreliability horrors of G.M's past. How can you expect that? Cadillac Cateras ( a recently discontinued car) certainly don't ring "Standard of the World" in my eyes, nor do Cadillac DTS's (a rebadged Coupe/Sedan De Ville)

I would also like to add that the Cadillac CTS is selling like hotcakes because it's the first car that Cadillac has produced that appeals to the driving enthusiast (race car engineering/ heritage). So-- "standard of the world" obviously means they need to build more cars like the CTS and stop fooling around with DTS's which don't seem to be selling significantly. I may sound biased, but I'm not trying to. I certainly don't see many DTS's running around Southern California, and believe me there are plenty of people that live out in this area that could afford them, but what do they choose to buy? They choose (in order of observed market share) Lexus, Toyota, Mercedes, Infiniti, Acura, Honda, then Cadillac CTS

Cheap interior in a car like the Cadillac CTS sends a very insulting message to a potential buyer that has money. Regardless of what you, I or anyone thinks of what BMW or Lexus charges for its cars--Do you think they could get what they get for their cars while not even considering Cadillac when they go to buy, if there weren't some confidence factor surrounding their product? G.M. has problems selling most of their cars at top dollar for a very good reason ---- terrible reputation...

mediapusher · January 2007

What? I have plenty of today for you. Putting front wheel drive on a car like DTS (they're crazy), continuance of pipe dream marketing, poor marketing, cars are too heavy, shift mechanisms that feel like they were built by Mattel, gaps and seams along door sills

, no hybrid vehicles that can compete with Asian cars. Does GM have a hybrid vehicle?? If so, why aren't they selling? Super limited availability pipe dream FLEX-FUEL technology.

...the frenzied 2008 hyped media blitz of their new electric concept car---If they're so concerned about being innovative with electric cars, they why did they "kill" the EV1 project? Do you think others don't ask this question and find G.M. to be scatterbrained? Their new electric car has a battery that costs ($12,000) A cost to high for them to even consider making any more drawings of the car, let alone put it into production.
---mediapusher
_____________________________
Sorry its talked about today so that GM bashers can still bash GM. I guess that means that there is nothing you can go after GM today for.
----snakeweasel

cooterbfd · January 2007

And would you please tell me why a G.M. assembly line worker expects to make executive level wages and beyond to put together a car?? ($42+ per hour)

Hmmm... I must say...$42/hr equates to $87,360 per yr. with no ot. Compare that with the $210 MILLION, yes MILLION!!! I repeat MILLION that Home Depot gave their executive as a boot in the [non-permissible content removed] on the way out for doing a bad job and I don't see how you can equate $42/hr as "EXECUTIVE LEVEL WAGES". Hell, and independant electrician will charge you more than that (yes, yes, I know, overhead).

imidazol97 · January 2007

>remind everyone to please stop the "brand-bashing" and keep the discussion civil and interesting for newcomers.
If we start digging ourselves into a hole, the whole topic becomes pointless.
This topic was intended by the creator of it to be about the future, not the past...at least that's why I joined it.
All the world already knows Cadillac's litany of past and ancient errors, so we're preaching to the choir.

I was hoping this discussion could end up on a positive tack instead of the old whining. It made a start but is now pulled back into the Cadillac's JANG mode (just ain't no good).

mediapusher · January 2007

Those wages are not justified if most of the cars aren't selling well. I wouldn't have a problem with if they were selling well.

sls002 · January 2007

They did not give that $210 million to him "as a boot...", but it was part of the contract to hire him in the first place. It would be wise to know what one it talking about in the first place. :P

louiswei · January 2007

Just saw the new "Life, Liberty, and Pursuit" commercial. It shows 3 old Caddies plus a STS-V and at end it states: Since 1902. It's relatively short, like less than 15 seconds. Okay commercial I guess but kinda of lame comparing to Chevy's "It's ooooouuuuurrrrr coooouuuunnnntry".

plekto · January 2007

I of course meant the end-of-year rebates and incentives. Even Honda offers a little off on their previous year models, and many Ford and GM buyers buy this way(as opposed to fleet sales and such). This knocks the price down a good 3-4K on most upper-end models. BMW and Mercedes and Lexus... Gotta haggle like crazy to maybe get $1K off.

Check this out:
http://www.carsdirect.com/build/options?zipcode=91107&acode=USB60BUC101D0&restor- e=false

Even Buick has $2500 off on the 2006 models. Officially, ther is a bit off on the 2006 CTSs as well, but finding one is getting really hard(seems they can sell all they make - that's not a bad sign, is it?)

http://www.carsdirect.com/build/options?zipcode=91107&acode=USB60MEC021D0&restor- e=false
Note that this is the top-end model with all the goodies. Add every bit of option and bling you can, and it's not even $24K.(actually a pretty nice car as it is at $21K)

So seeing a CTS in a year and a half(end of 2008/2009 models coming in) selling for $30K is definately a possibility. And honestly, 250+ HP out of the 3.6 is plenty if you have a manual transmission. That's actually about as much as you *want* with a 6 speed gearbox, since cars start to exhibit a binary throttle response once you get over 300HP or so.(though with automatic, it's understandable why you'd need 300HP to move it quickly, though)

cooterbfd · January 2007

Those wages are not justified if most of the cars aren't selling well. I wouldn't have a problem with if they were selling well.
Who's fault is it they aren't selling well? Line workers can only install what upper management buys for them.

cooterbfd · January 2007

They did not give that $210 million to him "as a boot...", but it was part of the contract to hire him in the first place. It would be wise to know what one it talking about in the first place
Well, GM signed a CONTRACT to pay these people this type of money. My point is what is MORE out of whack?

xrunner2 · January 2007

There's nothing wrong with a company using its heritage to sell new cars, especially when the competition (i.e., Lexus) doesn't have much of one.

Saw the heritage ad on tv. Recall there was a late 50's red Cadillac convertible shown. It seems that there were much much better designs by Cadillac - designs that were truly elegant - than that gross looking convertible with gigantic fins. There was another old Cadillac shown that also was gross, goofy looking - think it was a late 70's Seville with a bustle back. The front and rear of this car had absolutely no relationship, no integration. An abomination of a so-called design.

Cadillac has plenty very good designs from past that could have been used. A mystery to me how they chose the models that they did for their heritage to sell current product. One possible rationale is: look how great the new 2008 CTS looks and how far we have come in design over the years.

Mr_Shiftright · January 2007

" was hoping this discussion could end up on a positive tack instead of the old whining. It made a start but is now pulled back into the Cadillac's JANG mode (just ain't no good)."

Well I tried to get the message across but alas...I'm sure the regular host will intervene if the brand-bashing "rut" continues to dig itself deeper. The host has been most tolerant.

We try to be as democratic as possible so please be patient. Sometimes these things right themselves without intervention.

ON ANOTHER NOTE:

"Nostalgia" in marketing is a quick and easy way to right an ad, but an automaker has to be careful about this, especially in an age of such galloping technology. It wouldn't be wise I don't think for Cadillac to emphasis too much the Age of Excess....if I were them I'd stick to the glorious Golden Age of Cadillac, the 1930s, when it could indeed hold its own with just about any car in the world and when "princes and stars" really did own Cadillacs all over the world.

mediapusher · January 2007

Xrunner2-
The bustle back Cadillac Seville was the "Cadillac Catera" of it's era in the late 1970's in terms of aesthetics. The only people who thought it would be cool to release such a hideous looking vehicle back in those days was G.M. /Cadillac......totally out of touch with reality.
---mediapusher
_____________________________________________-
. There was another old Cadillac shown that also was gross, goofy looking - think it was a late 70's Seville with a bustle back. The front and rear of this car had absolutely no relationship, no integration. An abomination of a so-called design.
---xrunner2

xrunner2 · January 2007

Another reason the Allante is still talked about today is because people really wanted the idea of the Allante to work out. It was a gorgeous looking car and not only gorgeous, but "smart" looking.

And the models including Kelly (Al Bundy's daughter) were truly beautiful young women that were trying to highlight and show off the Allante's gorgeous design in a Married with Children episode. Remember Kelly practicing saying the word Allante to get it just right.

Apparently, Cadillac gave permission to the show to use the car and promote it to the demo group that watched Married.

douglasr · January 2007

Cadillac built 2,185 cars in Europe in 2006. GM also sold more cars outside North America than it did in the Continental United States. Cadillac only builds about 29-34% of its cars, and remainder are provided by suppliers like ZF, Magna, and Inteir---among many.

Cadillac even sold 1,171 cars in Japan...where Lexus in NOT popular having sold only 10,293 cars in the Japanese mainland versus more than 183,037 CARS in the U.S. to Cadillac's 142,765. Cadillac is regaining share in America, and also begining to make inroads in crucial overseas markets. Lexus would be a dead product if it were sustained only by its Japanese sales, (and for which, it was not available in Japan at the outset, allowing them to "dump" them in the U.S. market at $38,500 a copy.) WE do not do that. Cadillac has wisely chosen to open assembly plants in Europe and China in order to beat tariffs and some local taxation on imports. Yet the sales would not be there if the product did not exceed the buyer expectations---for they also have Audi, Mercedes, BMW, etc. to chose from. Lincoln is almost out of the game, so it falls to Cadillac to uphold the American marques oveseas. Favorable reviews of many American made cars in Detroit by the world press may yet signal the turning point in the public perception where American cars are not automatically regarded as inferior or shoddy vis a vis Japanese, German, and European counterparts.

Every car maker has built lemons, or had production disasters that yeilded some pretty terrible product. But what GM and Cadillac are doing now corrects much of that oversight. If Cadillac were a stand-alone company it would still require roughly 100,000 employees across dozens of global suppliers across several tier levels to make one car, and the combined assets of the company would run to $40-50Bn in revenues. The synergy of the design has now become paramount in the auto-industry, especially given the increasing technological level of the computer and electronic systems now demanded and necessary to meet engineering, environmetal, and regulatory performance criteron.

Cadillac is not quite back at the top yet, but they are now very near the summit. When Cadillac begins to outsell Lexus in Japan, even despite tariffs and taxation that make them a frighteningly expensive propasition, or for that matter in China, then we know they are winning again. The truth is in the driving, and the last brand new Cadillac I drove, their latest SUV had a seemless and excellent driveline. Interior quality was very good, but could still move up a notch. It was a car I would pay money for...and I don't consider myself a "Cadillac" man.

Quite simply, it looks as though Cadillac is getting it right...going after markets globally with American and Cadillac style. It was what made them a great car decades ago, and that idea is still consonant even today with a great product. Manufacturers don't spend ad dollars showing what they used to build when they don't have much faith in what they build now...when the old cars appear in the ads, then you know what they are building now is ostensibly better.

'Standard of the World'? Cadillac is now built around the world, and chance is in the offing that it can claim that title again.

DouglasR

(sources: automotive news.)

mediapusher · January 2007

I don't watch any of free broadcast national television so I wouldn't know about the promotion tie in that the Allante had with the TV show "Married with Children". From what I heard about that show I don't think I would have watched it anyway if I was inclined to watch national tv.

However it does seem kind of silly that they would have promoted the Allante with that show if they wanted people of high class to buy that vehicle
---mediapusher
______________________________________
And the models including Kelly (Al Bundy's daughter) were truly beautiful young women that were trying to highlight and show off the Allante's gorgeous design in a Married with Children episode. Remember Kelly practicing saying the word Allante to get it just right.

Apparently, Cadillac gave permission to the show to use the car and promote it to the demo group that watched Married.

Is Cadillac's Image Dying and Does Anyone Care?

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles