Fizzboy7

Excellent example. Dated exterior side styling coupled with retro front and rear styling is a no-go. The world has moved on and that's where people are dropping their dollars. The retro themes stem from GM executives who are stuck in the past and haven't grown up. GM doesn't need stuck in the past people wasting their money. Cadillac should be a showcase, ahead of the game brand, with modern styling that sets the trend. That is how the others lead and that is what GM should have been doing with the brand since the 90's. This mistake has repeated far too long to be forgiven.

mmarshall

Not sure I agree with that. The fins and/or vertical taillights have been a hallmark of Cadillac styling since the late 1940s....along with the traditional Buick fender-portholes. So, yes, they've been around a long time. But surveys show that customers still like them.....especially the loyalists. When Cadillac DID try something else, like with the Cimarron and Catrera.....well, let's just say that the results were less than favorable.

JessePS

I have to say GM doing a good job with their new models (design-wise), the interior still needs to be worked on. I was shocked that their most expensive Cadillac CT6 cost as much as a Lexus LS460.

mmarshall

Why be shocked? It was basically designed to compete with the LS (flagship Tier-2 sedan, RWD/AWD), though the fit/finish and overall assembly quality is not quite up to the LS level, and it lacks a V8, though the 400 HP TT V6 packs quite a punch.

UDel

What market shifts are favoring hybrids and EV luxury vehicles? They sell just as poorly today as they did 5 years ago? Huge waste of money and resources to focus on hybrids and electric luxury vehicles when nobody buys or wants them.

Cadillac overpriced their cars, put lousy interiors in them, ATS is way too cramped, they have course engines, and they have not been very reliable which is why they sell poorly. They need to fix the problems and pricing of the sedans and not dump a bunch of them and think that will work. If they price the CT5 too high, give it another cheapened touchscreen CUE interior with course engines it will fail also, EV's and hybrids won't sell either.

Sulu

Since perception and reception of styling is very personal, there is no right or wrong style, no good or bad style, and there is also no dated style. The styling of a product tends to follow fashion trends -- the current automotive fashion seems to be non-parallel, incongruent, unresolved lines and creases -- so there is only in-fashion or out-of-fashion.

Just because some automotive styling cues may be currently in fashion, it does not mean that a car that does not contain those cues is sporting a wrong, bad or dated style. In my opinion, cars that do not go overboard with current styling cues -- "boring" cars such as the Cadillac CT6 and previous-generation Camrys -- actually age better (and will continue to look "good" even after numbers of generations of that product) than cars that carry the most up-to-date styling cues (I believe that the current-generation Camry will age badly while previous-generations will continue to look "good").

There are also styling cues that an automaker wishes to continue to carry, despite how "dated" they may be, because they have become trademarks of the brand. Examples include the Mercedes-Benz, BMW, Audi and Lexus grilles, and the vertical, fin-like taillights on Cadillacs.

Fizzboy7

There IS a right and wrong style. The public will vote on that with their dollars. It is the first thing a person sees when first considering a car. You don't see the internals, you don't see the engine, you don't see the interior, and you don't see a price when viewing a car driving down the road for the first time. You see the exterior. Styling is by far the most important factor, as first impressions are everything and the beginning of an interest. It doesn't have to be what I like, but it has to be what the public likes. There are trends for today, and they serve a purpose and a profit. All other manufacturers know this and work with it. Buyers in this bracket are progressive. They don't want nor cannot relate to 1970's retro styling. The stubbornness and somewhat ignorant mantra GM execs have in not seeing this light is a costly, costly mistake.

mmarshall

I don't think it's simply a matter of styling. The buyers of today are mostly springing for car-based SUVs, which didn't exist at all in the 1970s....never mind styling trends.

Fizzboy7

Styling choice is not exclusive or immune just to sedans. Within the different categories of vehicles (cars, trucks SUV, pick-up), styling comes into play for all those. People can and are flocking to SUV's, but those vehicles will be selected based on styling as well. Same with cars, trucks, and the rest. It is the first thing people see and are either impressed with or not. This is especially true for younger buyers who have less connection or history with cars they once owned as a new driver. There is a reason why auto makers spend enormous dollars on market research, mock-ups, and focus groups on early, undecided offerings. If none of this were true, all cars and trucks would be giant square boxes with a steering wheel and four wheels.

Infra

iTrader: (1)

Cadillac is lost and doesn't know what to do. Boomers are retiring and not buying new cars anymore, and Cadillac has been too slow to retire their grandpa image. Mmarshall, you argue that they made a lot of money selling cars like the DTS, but no one cares about the money made in the past... only how they make money in the future. More cars like the XTS are money losers.

I don't think replacing the ATS and CTS with 1 car is going to work, though, as people do not cross shop a C class and an E class. They are distinct cars for distinct customers.

mmarshall

I warned several years ago that that would happen. However, they have got a new XT3 compact SUV coming in another year or so. With the hot SUV sales all across the industry, we'll see how that one does.

I don't quite agree with your premise. Baby Boomers, in general, have been working all their life, generally have their houses paid off, and their kids have grown, are done with college, and out on their own....often with kids and families of their own. The Boomers, on average (providing that medical and health-insurance expenses don't eat them up LOL), have a lot of money to spend on disposable items like a car....they have become the new well-heeled Grandpas and Grandmas. I do agree with you, though, that the XTS was a flop...except for the somewhat-better handling, a plush interior, and the AWD option that he DTS lacked, the XTS was not, IMO, really a proper replacement for it. The CT6 is somewhat of an improvement, but, IMO, seems to lack build-solidness, and is too firm-riding, even with the Magna-Ride shocks. In many ways, IMO, particularly with the standard 18" wheels, the current Buick Lacrosse, with its comfort, is close to what the proper DTS replacement should have been, and wasn't. But, of course (though I myself am getting one), the new Lacrosse generally isn't selling because of the huge SUV popularity and the fact that GM goofed up the Lacrosse's marketing in the trim-levels, used an unintuitive transmission E-shifter, and included a engine idle stop/start system without a de-activate button.

I won't comment on the replacement until I actually see it and test drive it.....but, given my so-so reactions to both the XTS and CT6, I'm not terribly hopeful on the ATS/CTS replacement. And, of course, besides, it's going to be a job just getting people to stay with sedans, period.....they're all jumping ship wth SUVs.

Aron9000

We've all carped ad-nausium about the crap interiors and CUE, that is definetly hurting sales. But I think there are two or three other factors at play here:

1. Completely alienating your traditional customer base with stiff riding and cramped cars. People buying Cadillac could give two craps less that it handles better that the base model ATS handles better than a BMW 3 series. They will notice that it has a lot less room and rides a lot stiffer than something like a Lexus ES350, C-class, or even said 3 series. Also putting those bunker like windows on all your cars makes them feel cramped, even on bigger models like the XTS that do have a lot of space.

2. Your quality and resale value is among the worst in the industry. Cadillacs have a long and sordid history going back to the early 80's of being unreliable, hard to work on, and expensive to fix. The resale value is so bad that rather than spending $5,000 to fix bad Northstar headgaskets, people were junking nice cars with under 100k miles on them because it just wasn't economically viable to keep them on the road(this was very common when I was active on the Cadillac boards back in the mid-late 00's). Even these newer cars with the turbo 4 cylinder and 3.6 V6 have bad reputations of constantly being in the shop for warranty work and being money pits out of warranty.

3. Your engine option mix sucks IMO. Why should I have the same engines in my 50-60k CTS that are available in a $30k Buick Regal???? Same thing if you compare the SRX/XT5 to other GM suvs, same engine. The LS series V8 engines are the best engines GM makes. Only way you can get one is in a $90,000 Escalade or a $90,000 CTS-V. ATS-V and CT6 buyers are left with a very lame sounding and overly complicated twin turbo V6. You get the better LT1 V8 engine with the same performance, better gas mileage and save $20,000 by buying a Camaro SS. For the same $$$$ as the ATS-V, you get the supercharged V8 ZL1 Camaro with 200 more horsepower.

As for the CT6, its already the under-dog coming from a brand with a damaged reputation, it needs the V8 option since all its competitors offer one. Cadillac has always been associated with the V8 IMO, that could have been a substantial differentiation, 400+hp V8 for the price of your six cylinder BMW, Benz, Lexus, etc. But no they're playing the me too game with an IMO garbage turbo 4(sound/refinement/reliability is lacking), and some decent, but no better than the competition V6 offerings.

chromedome

Aron9000 has it right and I'd like to add one more bit: Cadillac's biggest problem is Buick. Seriously. Buicks are half the price and have the same engines with better interior layouts and less polarizing styling. GM seems to have a tendency to shoot its own foot when it comes to product differentiation.

Cadillac is stupid to target the enthusiast market because it doesn't exist, not as a mass market segment. BMW is softening up all its cars and coming up with a ton of SUV/crossover variants. The hardcore M cars exist as halo models only. Even Lexus sells a ton more ES, NX and RX models compared to the IS and GS. Cadillac should have done the same, keeping soft and comfy models as its bread and butter, with the V variants being hardcore driver-focused vehicles.

It's interesting that the Chinese market has a soft spot for Buick but not for Caddy. I've seen a few ATS-Vs there and that's about it, whereas Veranos, Envisions and LaCrosses are everywhere.

mmarshall

+1

+2


+3

geko29

This is categorically false. A full 50% of retirement-age Boomers have $100,000 or less in retirement savings Well over a third have less than $50,000
The average 55 to 64 year old has $104,000 saved

$100k is enough to sustain an income of approximately $300/mo throughout retirement, and will be supplemented by an average of $1,360 in SS for singles, or $2,260 for married couples. So your average baby boomer couple is bringing home a little less than $31k/year. This is a little less than double the poverty level, and less than half of the median household income in the US. It's enough to replace roughly 40% of their pre-retirement income.

That's NOT what I would call "well-heeled", and I think most would agree. Since there's no formal economic definition for "well-heeled", I'll substitute "affluent". The definition of affluent is liquid assets of $100,000 to $1M, and annual household income exceeding $75k. The average boomer is nowhere in the vicinity of affluent.

It's great that your situation is well above-average. But that doesn't change the fact that the average retiring boomer is not rolling in dough.