Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

Is Cadillac's Image Dying and Does Anyone Care?

1959698100101121

Comments

  • sls002sls002 Member Posts: 2,788
    Proves nothing. However here is a C-class priced at $11,000 :surprise:
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    Proves there are many CTS valued exactly as they are offered for sale.

    If the owners paid even $30K when new, how's that for a value proposition?

    Let's check back in about a month. A line in the sand, if you will.

    Regards,
    OW
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    Why don't you use the data that ALG provides instead of picking specific single data points?
  • laurasdadalaurasdada Member Posts: 4,686
    But does anyone really want to buy a used first gen CTS??? I mean, look at it! Look at the interior!!! Really, the first time I saw the 1G CTS at the New England Auto Show years ago I was truly shocked at how (yes, IMO) ugly the car was inside (especially inside!) and out. And the sticker was $40k+!!! Seriously???!!!

    Now, Gen 2, I think we have an ugly duckling to almost swan transformation here. Clean up the front end, and we'll talk. The interior? Just a huge improvement...

    YMMV

    '21 Dark Blue/Black Audi A7 PHEV (mine); '22 White/Beige BMW X3 (hers); '20 Estoril Blue/Oyster BMW M240xi 'Vert (Ours, read: hers in 'vert weather; mine during Nor'easters...)

  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    Exactly my point. Ergo the depreciation is high.

    Regards,
    OW
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    I'll check ALG out. Until 2008, the CTS will not perform well regarding depreciation, IMO.

    Regards,
    OW
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    https://www.alg.com/depratings

    My link I listed earlier did not seem to work. anyway, all the below 2006 vehicles are 3 stars:

    Cadillac CTS Escalade
    Mercedes Benz C Class Clk Class Cls Class M Class R Class SL Class
    Acura RDX RL
    Audi A3 A6 Q7
    BMW X3 Series X5 Series
    Lexus ES350 GS350/430 LS460 LX470

    Looks to me like the data shows that the 2006 CTS is right in there with everyone of its competitors except the BMW 3 series and Acura TL which are 5 star and the 4 star BMW 5 series. So I guess we could say the 2006 CTS did not perform well in your reality but hangs out with some good company in the actual US everyone else lives in. :P

    ALG is pleased to announce the release of the ALG™ Depreciation Ratings. Based on 2006 model year vehicles, the 1 through 5 star ALG ratings provide consumers with an accurate and convenient method to determine the amount of depreciation a vehicle will experience over the lifetime of ownership. ALG Depreciation Ratings will be featured on Edmunds.com.
  • lemkolemko Member Posts: 15,261
    I drove a 2005 CTS and it wasn't a bad car. Really, the materials used in the car are nicer than they appear and it was a fun little ride and economical too. However, the new CTS is so awesome, the old one comes on like a plate spinner who appears on the Ed Sullivan Show after the Beatles.
  • sls002sls002 Member Posts: 2,788
    I assume that the 1G is supposed to be the trim level :confuse:
    The STS has a 1SG trim level (top performance package)
    The CTS has been available as the 1SA and 1SB only in the past I think. Certainly never went past a 1SC. However, the plastic interior was not ugly in my opinion, only rather plain looking, and while the plastic finish may have be expensive, the look was cheap. The door panels were perhaps too simple and an expanse of mostly hard plastic. The new interior is probably much better, but I have not seen one.
  • sls002sls002 Member Posts: 2,788
    The actual rate of depreciation is not given. But there are 5 different levels of ratings, so the CTS is in the middle.
  • sls002sls002 Member Posts: 2,788
    The Mercedes C-class is no better than the CTS for retaining value. :P
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    But there are 5 different levels of ratings, so the CTS is in the middle.

    And, as has been noted, has similar depreciation to most of it's competition.

    If you want actual depreciation you need to pay for it or go to a bank who did.

    Anyone know of any other source other than looking at the classified's? (something like reading tea leaves).
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    In listening to Lutz during the question and answer period he mentioned that a number of new small vehicles will be developed for Cadillac and Pontiac/Buick.

    I have not heard much lately on the BLS replacement. Did a google search and the hits are all pretty old.

    Anyone know how to google and list out by date?
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    We all have our favorites, our own loyalties and preferences. But in a survey of new vehicle buyers released today, only one brand can be at the top. The number one brand in the US in owner satisfaction in 2008 is Cadillac, according to AutoPacific’s annual Vehicle Satisfaction Awards (VSA) study.

    This study is based solely on the opinions of actual new vehicle owners rating their new 2008 models. AutoPacific adds no “3rd party” opinion to the owner survey results, which are grouped into 28 car and truck segments. For more information, check out AutoPacific’s blog.

    Cadillac’s overall win stems from the Escalade, Escalade EXT, the new CTS sport sedan and the DTS luxury sedan each winning the title as “most satisfying” in their individual market segments. Across all segments in the study, no auto brand (including BMW, Lexus, Mercedes and the others) was rated as highly by consumers as Cadillac.


    Says they only asked actual owners of the vehcles. Do they not know that the non owners have an opinion also and that their reality is more important?
  • lemkolemko Member Posts: 15,261
    Ask the man who owns one! I'm on my fifth Cadillac and I'm still a young man! If that isn't a ringing endorsement for Cadillac, what is?
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    We need to hook you up with that plate spinner guy from the Ed Sullivan Show and do a commercial. Maybe Topo Gigo can show up too. :shades:
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    In your reality, how much should I pay for a 2006 CTS in today's dollars?

    Regards,
    OW
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    Do they not know that the non owners have an opinion also and that their reality is more important?

    Why would non-owners opinion or reality be important anyway? It's the owner's that count, right? If they are happy, that is very good. Seriously. :shades:

    Regards,
    OW
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    Well, per my reality, which is still part of the US, blue book says, whoops the site is down. Guess it is worth nothing since the data is not available. Or perhaps it is infinite?

    http://www.kbb.com/kbb/UsedCars/default.aspx#YearId=2006&ManufacturerId=8&ModelI- d=29

    But I did find a site that had it listed.
    View PicturesKelley Blue Book Price: $20,300 - $29,300

    msrp was under $29k. Could get it over $40k though if you tried.

    3 series
    Kelley Blue Book Price: $24,400 - $35,600

    c Kelley Blue Book Price: $22,200 - $34,800
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 57,097
    MSRP + 15%, aging like a fine wine
  • laurasdadalaurasdada Member Posts: 4,686
    The 1st Generation (1G, in my shorthand...) CTS was a good car for GM/Caddy. From what I've read, it rode/handled/sold well. More European in reality than just marketing. And Caddy made a statement with its Arts and Crafts, er Sciences, styling direction. All well and good.

    But, as I earlier stated, to look at it was to want to look away. A basically handsome sedan just all muddled up with a terrible front end (truck-like), a too tall and busy rear-end (cleaned up somewhat through the years) and a profile ruined by extra layers and cut lines.

    The interior: As Lutz noted, they used expensive materials but made them look cheap! Plus, to me, just the overall design looked incongruous and, well, cheap... The center stack, I think, was designed to look like a PC tower, and they ain't exactly pretty...!

    Throw in the Mercedes/BMW/Audi pricing and I had no desire to even drive it. I'm sure Caddy doesn't miss me...

    '21 Dark Blue/Black Audi A7 PHEV (mine); '22 White/Beige BMW X3 (hers); '20 Estoril Blue/Oyster BMW M240xi 'Vert (Ours, read: hers in 'vert weather; mine during Nor'easters...)

  • laurasdadalaurasdada Member Posts: 4,686
    1G=1st Generation (CTS).

    '21 Dark Blue/Black Audi A7 PHEV (mine); '22 White/Beige BMW X3 (hers); '20 Estoril Blue/Oyster BMW M240xi 'Vert (Ours, read: hers in 'vert weather; mine during Nor'easters...)

  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    I'm sure Caddy doesn't miss me...

    ...or me!

    Regards,
    OW
  • louisweilouiswei Member Posts: 3,715
    ...or me!

    Plus one more here...
  • marsha7marsha7 Member Posts: 3,703
    Topo Gigio...I am surprised anyone remembers him...
  • marsha7marsha7 Member Posts: 3,703
    Topo Gigio...I am surprised anyone remembers him...then again, I have trouble remembering the Beatles...
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    I do! He wouldn't be caught dead in a Cadillac, either!

    image

    Regards,
    OW
  • nortsr1nortsr1 Member Posts: 1,060
    No, but at least he delivers the mail!!!!
  • laurasdadalaurasdada Member Posts: 4,686
    Didn't Topo Gigio dance in a cage while the Beatles played on the Sullivan show? Or was that a Fiat Topolino? Or Goldie Hawn?

    They all might have driven Caddys. Just not post, say, 1976...

    "Say Goodnight, Dick."

    '21 Dark Blue/Black Audi A7 PHEV (mine); '22 White/Beige BMW X3 (hers); '20 Estoril Blue/Oyster BMW M240xi 'Vert (Ours, read: hers in 'vert weather; mine during Nor'easters...)

  • laurasdadalaurasdada Member Posts: 4,686
    "No, but at least he delivers the mail!!!! "

    Oh, so Topo Gigio is Italian for Karl Malone! Or is it Cliff Clavin? Or a so-so Kevin Costner movie? Does Topo Gigio always ring twice?

    Goodnight, Dick.

    '21 Dark Blue/Black Audi A7 PHEV (mine); '22 White/Beige BMW X3 (hers); '20 Estoril Blue/Oyster BMW M240xi 'Vert (Ours, read: hers in 'vert weather; mine during Nor'easters...)

  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    Get ready for a really big shoe...

    1. GM has eight vehicle brands, and at least half of them—Saab, Saturn, Pontiac, and Buick—are struggling.

    2. Saturn, Pontiac, and Buick cars are mostly redundant "badge jobs" with the same underpinnings as Chevrolet, GMC, or Cadillac vehicles, and Saab is a low-volume niche brand that most likely loses money.

    3. Another reason GM won't kill off any of its mainline brands is that it will instantly lose market share, since there's no guarantee a Pontiac or Saturn customer will automatically become a Chevrolet or GMC customer. So GM is effectively sustaining underperforming divisions to keep its market share up, and no company can succeed for long by paying for market share.

    4. GM knows it has to offer small cars just as good as Hondas and Toyotas. Maybe even better, since GM is so far behind its Asian rivals in this segment. GM has greatly improved the quality of its passenger cars, and some new small entries are on the way. Recent plans call for shifting even more resources from trucks and SUVs, which are rapidly falling out of favor, to smaller cars. Honda and Toyota have a huge lead, though, and even with some killer offerings, it will take years for GM to challenge them.

    5. GM hopes that the plug-in Chevrolet Volt, due in 2010, will be a buzz-mobile that helps it regain industry leadership. While cautious of GM hyperbole, analysts and industry experts are buying it—so far. If GM cuts funding for the Volt or stumbles, it will be a major credibility blow. But if GM delivers—on time—the Volt could signify a resurgence in Detroit.

    6. The most agonizing part of GM's recovery—if it happens—is that huge savings from a deal reached last year with the unions won't begin to materialize until 2010. That's when GM will finally start to deal with its mountainous healthcare obligations to retirees. While not exactly saying so, GM leaders seem to have been putting off other big changes while hoping the retiree fixes that are on the way will help solve many of its problems. It's now clear that GM needs a lot of other surgery before then.

    The Doctor says surgery is very risky, however, and medical insurance will not cover the groundbreaking alternative medicine that could save it's life...the transfusion of US management with new Asian and Euro blood! Will the family come up with enough money to pay for the alternative medicine?

    Stay tuned...it's going to be a nail-biter!

    Regards,
    OW
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    you tell me.

    This is a sad story from where I come from...with a yet unknown ending.

    link title

    Regards,
    OW
  • m4d_cowm4d_cow Member Posts: 1,491
    I've said this before, GM and other domestics seriously need to learn from Nissan. They went from nearly bankrupt to the top of the food chain again in about a decade, a very short time in the corporate world. Learn what they can and cant do, then crawl back from the bottom.
    Personally, I think what GM needs to save itself is simplifying their subdivisions. Kill the useless minor ones, like Pontiac, Saturn, GMC and Hummer. Keep Buick, as it has strong reputation in China, and China is the world's biggest market right now. Keep Saab, sales are doing decent in Europe, much better than Chevy itself. Keep Subaru (obviously) and Isuzu also, why Isuzu? Because their trucks and diesel engines are still among the best, and best selling in the asian market. However, kill the passenger car market, its pointless. Save the money they spend on badge jobs and running the worthless, money losing subdivisions, use it to hire a real pro like Carlos Ghosn instead.

    Oh and one more thing, Cadillac. Start concentrating in China, there are more an more newbie millionaires in China than anywhere else today, and they dig Escalades. Stroll around in Beijing and Shanghai and you'll see a bunch of them there. China is an odd market where Audis outsell BMWs, and Cadi should take that advantage.

    Of course, with all things said I actually appreciate Cadillac's 1st comeback, the 1st gen CTS. When you compare it with another rebounding luxo brand like, say, Infiniti's 1st gen G35, its actually a decent car. Although I dislike the interior, its not that different from G35's in quality. When you think about it they're actually worthy equals, dont you think? The only problem with it is none other than: pricing! Too close to even Audi!! If only they can lower their expectations and start low, Cadillac may be seeing a better comeback scenario right now.

    Just my personal thoughts...
  • louisweilouiswei Member Posts: 3,715
    Keep Subaru (obviously)

    How? Since GM already sold all its shares to Toyota. With holding 17% of the shares, Toyota right now is the largest shareholder of Subaru. A joint-venture entry level RWD coupe is also in development between the two companies.

    China is an odd market where Audis outsell BMWs

    If you know the history of China's auto industry then there is nothing odd about that. There is no way Cadillac will have the same success as Audi did in China.
  • plektoplekto Member Posts: 3,738
    GM has the small vehicles. They are only for sale in Europe, though.(where they soundly stomp on the few U.S. models that are brought over.
  • louisweilouiswei Member Posts: 3,715
    GM has the small vehicles. They are only for sale in Europe, though

    I don't get it, how's the GM small vehicles has anything to do with Subaru and Caddy being successful in China?

    :confuse:
  • plektoplekto Member Posts: 3,738
    Those small cars are mostly the brands that GM wants to kill or made by them(Holden for instance is essentially Pontiac in Europe). Downsizing is a lot harder than it first appears. But one thing is clear. They must bring smaller cars to the U.S. as SUVs are *finally* becoming less popular.
  • sls002sls002 Member Posts: 2,788
    Not quite sure what your point is, but:

    In the middle of the twentyith century Cadillac's advertising made people percive Cadillac to be something more than it really was. After WWII Cadillac was probably the leading near luxury make in production, with Lincoln and Chryslers Imperial prime competition. Those who wanted true luxury bought Rolls Royces, but right after WWII a Rolls was probably in very short supply. In the thirties, the Cadillac V16's, with custom made bodies probably were true luxury cars. The depression wiped out most of the true luxury cars, with Packard on its death bed after WWII.

    Those of you who think Cadillac was somehow the "Standard of the World" at some point in the past, surpassing all of its competition, have bought the "advertising hype" hook, line and sinker so to speak. I think that Cadillac has always been a good value for a near luxury car. For a short time Cadillac did have some high end models, but this was during the depression. Since WWII Cadillac has only produced the lower end of the models it had before WWII.
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    Your assessment is right on the money. Caddy was never a luxury standard.

    GM's reputation for building high quality luxury passenger cars is ruined forever anyway, until every last person who bought a Caddy in the 70's and 80s is dead! :sick:

    Regards,
    OW
  • cooterbfdcooterbfd Member Posts: 2,770
    .....Caddy was never a luxury standard.

    As he said, prior to WWII, it was. That died with the death of custom coach builders. BTW, I don't think that MB or BMW were luxury standards in the post WWII era either. That has only come into play in the last 30 years or so.

    I do remember reading how Cadillac in the '50's tried ( and succeeded) in "mass marketing" luxury cars, based on the fact that by the mid '60's they were selling over 125,000 deVilles, and by the early '70's, that number climbed to over 200,000 EACH YEAR. Now, if you want to argue that luxury and exclusivity should go hand in hand, OK. Fine. But in many ways, as people back then would retire, get their gold watch, a comfy LaZboy, and then "splurge" on a deVille and ride off into the sunset of their lives, it WAS a gold standard of sorts, in that people aspired to own one.

    Now, as far as the new CTS goes, if this is any indication of how the brand is going, now adding a coupe and wagon variant, they WILL be a player for years to come. Maybe not the "standard", but a player. You could also argue that with competition from both sides of the world as strong as it is, the true "standard bearer" is the one with the best current product, whether that be Caddy, MB Lexus, or whomever, and that title won't last more than a year or two.
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    As he said, prior to WWII, it was.

    Not a global standard.

    Regards,
    OW
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    What's not a global standard in these

    Because there are these...

    link title

    link title

    Regards,
    OW
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 57,097
    Cool, I like that unrestored V16

    Rolls even had a factory in the US during the roaring 20s, so it must have been enough of a standard to warrant such an expense.

    MB was virtually unknown in the US before WW2, save for a few movie star types in Hollywood and eccentric east coast , but the custom bodied supercharged cars ranked up there with RR in Europe.

    Caddy was exported then and was a highline car, but did not trump RR or MB in those markets when it came to prestige or period luxury. It could have been equal in many aspects, but was not an overall standard.
  • cooterbfdcooterbfd Member Posts: 2,770
    But here, it was the standard....The Cadillac of automobiles (OK it wasn't a "Duesy"). I found this clip from a Time magazine article from 1934. It seems even Rolls Royce produced cars for the common man:

    Rolls-Royce of America, Inc., founded nine years later with U. S. capital, and British control, began producing cars in 1921. Even before Depression, the makers found that many a well-to-do U. S. businessman, financially able to own a Rolls, hesitated to buy one for fear of appearing unduly swanky in so luxurious a car (average price: $18,000). Rolls-Royce hastened to blast away this sales resistance with advertisements boldly captioned: To the Man Who is Afraid to Let His Dreams Come True. But during Depression the number of such fearful men grew so great that Rolls-Royce sales since 1931 fell off over 50% to $926,000.

    "Last week, after four years of Depression deficits, Rolls-Royce hit upon a brand new idea. President John S. Inskip put on display in Manhattan a hybrid 'luxury" car, the Brewster "Cabriolet de Ville," with which he hoped to develop a new market. It had a Brewster body, a Ford chassis, a Ford V-8 engine. Price: $3,500. President Inskip had wangled a contract out of Henry Ford to supply engines and chassis in bulk. At the Springfield, Mass. plant of Brewster & Co. Inc., onetime famed carriage makers, now wholly owned by Rolls-Royce, the chassis were to be lengthened and partly reshaped to fit Brewster bodies."

    Not to mention, RR used coachbuilders extensively, just like Cadillac did. Considering the difference in prices, I guess you would have to say that RR was (and is) in a class all by themselves.

    The article says that the avg price of a Rolls was $18,000, whereas those V-16 Caddies were between $6-9,000 (unknown if that included coachwork).
  • aldwaldw Member Posts: 82
    The landed aristocrats in the US preferred Packards, with Pierce-Arrows and Peerless among them, but in terms of performance Duesenberg was the American Ferrari of its day, besting the Rolls-Royces and Bugattis of the same period. Cadillac was best in terms of mechanical reliability and manufacturing, as well as better transmissions, due to GM's economic muscle. Any of these vehicles, though were fit for royalty and were purchased as such.
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 57,097
    Exactly, it was the standard in the US - with Packard and Pierce Arrow up there for a time, too.

    Not many Brewster's were built, it was kind of a desperation move. I do seem to recall Charlie Chaplin owned one...I guess that's worth something. And by the decade Caddy would have lower priced cars too.

    If one is to be the world standard, is price an issue?

    I think those prices were for Fleetwood/Fisher bodied cars, other custom bodies would be more.
  • cooterbfdcooterbfd Member Posts: 2,770
    "I think those prices were for Fleetwood/Fisher bodied cars, other custom bodies would be more."

    Fleetwood/Fisher were exclusive to the 8 and 12 cyl models. As far as the 16's, other coachbuilders were involved as well.

    The 8's and 12's ranged in price from$3,295 to $5,800.

    As for the 16's, my book quotes $5,700 to $9,800. BUT, just like other fine manufacturers of the time,many of these left the factory as a cowled rolling chassis, and the coachwork was custom, leaving many to be considered "one-offs", and their provenance may have to do just as much with their current values as anything. This is where i put Cadillac on par with many of the other manufacturers of the time. I'm sure if someone layed out 12,15,18 thousand for a car back then, attention to detail and craftmanship was top notch, whether the body rested on a Caddy, RR,MB,Packard, Pierce, or any other name.
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    Now, fast forward to today, and the luxury of Cadillac is far from ANY standard around the world. The difference back then was a heck of a lot smaller.

    Regards,
    OW
  • cooterbfdcooterbfd Member Posts: 2,770
    The difference back then was negligible, based on the fact that many were coach -built.

    The difference today is that Caddy is trying to re-establish themselves in the luxury car market. Had we not had an oil crisis, and Caddy decided to build the Sixteen.....
Sign In or Register to comment.