mmarshall

GM was probably working on those trucks before they made the decision to cancel the sedans....which was less than two years ago.

The true reason they were working on those trucks is profit. Like Ford with the Expedition/Navigator and F-150, GM makes more profit off of Silverados and their full-size truck-based SUVs than with any other vehicles. The shareholders love them.

SW17LS

I just don't see any similarity at all, other than they both are from a company called "Cadillac"

SW17LS

The reason they do everything is profit. Again, its a business. Profit is the only goal.

mmarshall

True, but with those vehicles, they have an especially big incentive......they generally make more on each of them than they do with anything else. And they can sell them at those high, profit-making prices, even with incentives, because people want them and are willing to pay it.

I think my own days of driving large vehicles are about over. Yes, I like the comfort (and it's hard to beat the comfort of the S-class you're looking at), but they simply don't meet my driving needs any more....I need something easy to manuver and park at close quarters, and with higher ground clearance.

SW17LS

Which is why it makes such sense for them to work hard on them and focus on them. Because they make a profit. Only goal is profit...remember.

Why would they make hard to sell low profit cars when they can make easy to sell high profit cars? That would be bad business.

mmarshall

Well, to some extent, you also have to take volume into account. It's simple math. If automakers can sell a high volume of lower-profit vehicles, they can make as much or more than if they sell only a few very high-profit vehicles like the Escalade or Navigator. In the auto industry, that's what is called your "Break-Even" number...the number of sales you have to (theoretically) make on any given model before you can recuperate your development/production costs and start to actually make money on it. In general, although are a number of exceptions, the larger the vehicle, the lower the break-even point, although GM made some big profits just on the sheer number of early-model Chevy Citations that were sold (until all the recalls LOL) , even though the profit per vehicle was not very high.

GM and Ford also have fairly high costs that they have to deal with in worker benefits, even though the benefits and salaries have been significantly slashed in recent years. That, of course, affects profit per vehicles. Personally, though (and I won't get into it in detail here, because I have discussed that issue at length in other threads), I'm not opposed to that.....I'm a firm believer in worker benefits, especially for risky and often-hazardous work like vehicle assembly-lines.

SW17LS

That’s not how manufacturing and profit works, but I’m not going to change your mind so I’m not going to bother.

mmarshall

It's not a matter of changing "my" mind.....that's the industry itself. There's nothing I said about production itself that was false. The Break-Even point in a vehicle's production is a well-known, well-documented, and accepted term in the auto industry. It is something that every CEO and Planning-Manager worth their salt is concerned with.

Now, as to worker-benefits, yes, that is simply my subjective opinion, not necessarily business-fact. That's a personal view of mine, based on morals.....you give the company your best, they owe you something for it.

Wilson2000

True dat! There are, however, short-term and long-term profits to consider. Some manufacturers have become enormously successful by focusing on the later. Too, if a manufacturer puts all their eggs in one basket, they are more prone to harm from future market fluctuations in an ever-changing economy.

mmarshall

Not if the government keeps bailing them out. Chrysler, for example, has either been bankrupt or on the edge of bankruptcy three or four times now. They would have folded for sure in the early 1980s if Lee Iacocca had not done such hard work and been so effective in getting that loan.

Anyhow, we're getting off-topic....the 2021 Tahoe/Suburban.

AJT123

Yes, a big maroon red Cadillac Escalade with lots of chrome and a reddish interior. And column shifter. Who cares that it's a truck? That's an homage to the last of the big body RWD Caddies of the 80s and early 90s.

You must not be a fan of older Caddys; I personally love them. I would drive around an old pristine Caddy in a second.

SW17LS

I just dont see any similarities other than both are Cadillacs.



Shocker lol

mmarshall

In spirit, I agree with you, although, in the driving/parking conditions in my area, vehicles like that are becoming impractical. That's why I'm downsizing significantly and getting something with a higher ground-stance.

SW17LS

I don’t feel my 205 inch long LS460L is impractical here.

mmarshall

If you maneuvered and parked in the same places I regularly do, you may feel differently. You have a big single-family home, with I would assume a double-car garage and a big wide driveway. I also shop regularly in very crowded parking lots. A big house like yours would be impractical for me, as a single person, for many reasons, plus the fact that I'm getting older and could not take care of a place like that.

I also had an incident (not an accident) in my Lacrosse a few weeks ago from trying to maneuver in a confined space bordered by jutting/unseen curbs...an incident I'd rather not discuss at this time.

That, BTW, is why my next vehicle (the Encore GX) is going to have blind-spot-monitoring, a 360-camera, rear-traffic cross-alert, lane-detection, forward-obstacle-detection, and higher ground clearance. Yes, there is a method to my madness LOL.