Cadillac - The Standard of the World?

[DGS49]

I have always liked (some) Cadillacs, and I tend to "root" for them in their competition in the American auto marketplace.

In recent years, I like what they did with the CTS and especially with the ATS, and according to the car magazines both of them are "on par with" most of the sacred cows of Europe, as far as quality and performance. (I regret to report that I haven't had an opportunity to drive an ATS yet, but from all reports it is a great car).

So it was with some distress that I learned recently that BMW, Audi, and Mercedes are all kicking the shit out of Cadillac in the marketplace. EACH of them sells far more than Caddy both in their main line cars and with the exotics. If you would combine their sales and compare "German luxury cars" versus Cadillac, it would be on the order of ten to one in favor of The Huns.

There is an article in the current Car & Driver magazine (my last one) that says the CTS and ATS lines are being temporarily shut down due to dealer over-supplies, which are over 100 days. They are growing cobwebs on the steering wheels, sitting in dealers' lots.

The writer says that they are too expensive, and in fact the pricing is ridiculous. The base prices of all of the Caddy's are "high," and with the normal compement of options even an ATS runs well over 40 grand. And the CTS recently saw a big price increase, with no apparent increase in "value."

But the same is true of the German cars.

Furthermore, I don't think Cadillac falls down on the secondary factors - maintenance cost, reliability, and resale value - as they might have in the past century. Their styling is "distinctive," which is to say that it might turn some people off, but who cares about styling anyway?

What is it? Why are they failing in the marketplace? Is it a prejudice on the part of the buying public - they just assume that German is better? Or are the cars really not worthy of being competitive?

Inquiring minds want to know.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Cadillac's heydey was when the only competition was Lincoln. They have never been competitive when it came to the German luxury brands because they targeted a different segment. Furthermore the Germans built their product lines on the basis of have smaller and cheaper models with better handling for younger buyers and then the larger models for older buyers.

The bean counters who took over GM never understood that in order for there to be an ongoing supply of buyers the product needed to build brand loyalty similar to that of the German makers. It is worth noting that the Japanese have adopted the German brand model rather than the failed one that both GM and Ford are using.

If Cadillac wants to regain market share it is going to have to find a way to emulate the Japanese who followed the German model in my opinion.

 

[Uncensored2008]

What is it? Why are they failing in the marketplace? Is it a prejudice on the part of the buying public - they just assume that German is better? Or are the cars really not worthy of being competitive?

Inquiring minds want to know.

Is this your way of noticing that Obama runs GM as poorly as he runs the nation?

 

[Derideo_Te]

What is it? Why are they failing in the marketplace? Is it a prejudice on the part of the buying public - they just assume that German is better? Or are the cars really not worthy of being competitive?

Inquiring minds want to know.

Is this your way of noticing that Obama runs GM as poorly as he runs the nation?

Only a fool believes that Obama has anything at all to do with the running of GM.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

What is it? Why are they failing in the marketplace? Is it a prejudice on the part of the buying public - they just assume that German is better? Or are the cars really not worthy of being competitive?

Inquiring minds want to know.

Is this your way of noticing that Obama runs GM as poorly as he runs the nation?

Only a fool believes that Obama has anything at all to do with the running of GM.

Inevitable that the low-info dummies would blame Obama.

Cadillac can't compete because other makers make a better product for the money.

 

[mudwhistle]

I have always liked (some) Cadillacs, and I tend to "root" for them in their competition in the American auto marketplace.

In recent years, I like what they did with the CTS and especially with the ATS, and according to the car magazines both of them are "on par with" most of the sacred cows of Europe, as far as quality and performance. (I regret to report that I haven't had an opportunity to drive an ATS yet, but from all reports it is a great car).

So it was with some distress that I learned recently that BMW, Audi, and Mercedes are all kicking the shit out of Cadillac in the marketplace. EACH of them sells far more than Caddy both in their main line cars and with the exotics. If you would combine their sales and compare "German luxury cars" versus Cadillac, it would be on the order of ten to one in favor of The Huns.

There is an article in the current Car & Driver magazine (my last one) that says the CTS and ATS lines are being temporarily shut down due to dealer over-supplies, which are over 100 days. They are growing cobwebs on the steering wheels, sitting in dealers' lots.

The writer says that they are too expensive, and in fact the pricing is ridiculous. The base prices of all of the Caddy's are "high," and with the normal compement of options even an ATS runs well over 40 grand. And the CTS recently saw a big price increase, with no apparent increase in "value."

But the same is true of the German cars.

Furthermore, I don't think Cadillac falls down on the secondary factors - maintenance cost, reliability, and resale value - as they might have in the past century. Their styling is "distinctive," which is to say that it might turn some people off, but who cares about styling anyway?

What is it? Why are they failing in the marketplace? Is it a prejudice on the part of the buying public - they just assume that German is better? Or are the cars really not worthy of being competitive?

Inquiring minds want to know.

Any Government Motors product is a piece of shit. The Caddy is top of the line, but it's still a piece of shit compared to a Mercedes. A smooth ride and reliability, and less need for maintenance makes Mercedes a much better product.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Only a fool believes that Obama has anything at all to do with the running of GM.

No, of course Obama doesn't run GM, He used taxpayer funds to buy it, then gifted it to his Union cronies in return for votes.

 

[longknife]

I can think of several other vehicles that far outweigh The Big C for luxury, dependability, and overall class.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Only a fool believes that Obama has anything at all to do with the running of GM.

No, of course Obama doesn't run GM, He used taxpayer funds to buy it, then gifted it to his Union cronies in return for votes.

VERY Low-information dummy ^^^

 

[Derideo_Te]

Only a fool believes that Obama has anything at all to do with the running of GM.

No, of course Obama doesn't run GM, He used taxpayer funds to buy it, then gifted it to his Union cronies in return for votes.

So now you are backtracking on your foolish allegation?

Is this your way of noticing that Obama runs GM as poorly as he runs the nation?

 

[Mr Natural]

And, of course, it's the overpaid workers at Cadillac that are holding the division back.

 

[Uncensored2008]

VERY Low-information dummy ^^^

Remember, the reason you're a Communist is because you are stupid...

{
President Obama handed the United Auto Workers $30.0 billion—more than the U.S. spent on all foreign aid programs in 2012 ($20.0 billion). The union collected three-quarters more than NASA’s $17.2 billion budget for 2012.[43] This was as much money as Congress appropriated at the start of the year to keep unemployment insurance benefits extended at 73 weeks.[44] The UAW subsidies cost two and a half times as much as Congress spent last year on the Executive Office of the President, the legislative branch, and the judicial branch combined ($12.1 billion);[45] more than the Department of Labor spent on job training programs ($11.2 billion);[46] and almost as much as running the entire Department of Justice ($31.2 billion).[47]

}

Auto Bailout or UAW Bailout Taxpayer Losses Came from Subsidizing Union Compensation

 

[Uncensored2008]

Only a fool believes that Obama has anything at all to do with the running of GM.

No, of course Obama doesn't run GM, He used taxpayer funds to buy it, then gifted it to his Union cronies in return for votes.

So now you are backtracking on your foolish allegation?

Is this your way of noticing that Obama runs GM as poorly as he runs the nation?

Derp derp derp indeed, comrade.

 

[DGS49]

Ahem...

There is no German or Japanese car that is superior right now to a properly-optioned CTS or ATS, in any measurable way. Styling, price, performance, economy...nothing. And European cars have ALWAYS been more maintenance-intensive than Cadillac, which is why BMW was forced to include maintenance in the price several years ago.

And it was not SO long ago that most people switching from Cadillac to Mercedes were ENRAGED at the high cost of REQUIRED maintenance for the German car. And you were threatened with punitiv action if you didn't keep the service record current in your owner's manual.

There is no rational reason to prefer a C-class or a 1-Series or an A4 to an ATS - all optioned to the same price. Same for a CTS versus 5-series, E-class or A6. It is something OTHER THAN tangible considerations.

Which is the point of this thread.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Ahem...

There is no German or Japanese car that is superior right now to a properly-optioned CTS or ATS, in any measurable way. Styling, price, performance, economy...nothing. And European cars have ALWAYS been more maintenance-intensive than Cadillac, which is why BMW was forced to include maintenance in the price several years ago.

And it was not SO long ago that most people switching from Cadillac to Mercedes were ENRAGED at the high cost of REQUIRED maintenance for the German car. And you were threatened with punitiv action if you didn't keep the service record current in your owner's manual.

There is no rational reason to prefer a C-class or a 1-Series or an A4 to an ATS - all optioned to the same price. Same for a CTS versus 5-series, E-class or A6. It is something OTHER THAN tangible considerations.

Which is the point of this thread.

Actually there are rational reasons.

If it costs the same amount in each instance then it boils down to what is the perception of each brand. BMW and Audi market themselves as sports oriented luxury vehicles. Mercedes tends to stick more to just being exclusive upscale luxury vehicles. Whichever one you purchase you are going to be paying for the name when it comes to servicing.

And that is where the rub comes in. If the Caddy is cheaper to service because it uses the same underpinnings as a Camaro or an Impala then you don't have the same name brand value.

Yes, if the service costs are on a par with the name brand that keeps them exclusive. If your Caddy is being serviced next to a Cruz or a Sonic in the bays that brings down the name brand.

FYI my MINI services are pretty reasonable and since the Countryman is the identical platform to the 1-Series I am getting the benefit of a great name brand and affordable servicing. Don't see any reason why I would trade in the vehicle that puts a smile on my face every time I drive it for a Caddy.

 

[DGS49]

As I said, it's intangible reasons, not quantitative decisionmaking. Caddy is cheaper to service because Cadillac owners would not tolerate the "A Service" and "B Service" bullshit that M-B owners put up with. When it comes to repairs (thankfully not frequent), they are all expensive, but that has a lot to do with dealer overhead.

 

[Derideo_Te]

As I said, it's intangible reasons, not quantitative decisionmaking. Caddy is cheaper to service because Cadillac owners would not tolerate the "A Service" and "B Service" bullshit that M-B owners put up with. When it comes to repairs (thankfully not frequent), they are all expensive, but that has a lot to do with dealer overhead.

BZZZT Wrong!

You did not say "intangible reasons", you said "There is no rational reason".

There is a big difference between those two.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Though not written for a caddy, this seems to fit --

Buick
By Karl Shapiro
As a sloop with a sweep of immaculate wing on her delicate spine
And a keel as steel as a root that holds in the sea as she leans,
Leaning and laughing, my warm-hearted beauty, you ride, you ride,
You tack on the curves with parabola speed and a kiss of goodbye,
Like a thoroughbred sloop, my new high-spirited spirit, my kiss.

As my foot suggests that you leap in the air with your hips of a girl,
My finger that praises your wheel and announces your voices of song,
Flouncing your skirts, you blueness of joy, you flirt of politeness,
You leap, you intelligence, essence of wheelness with silvery nose,
And your platinum clocks of excitement stir like the hairs of a fern.

But how alien you are from the booming belts of your birth and the smoke
Where you turned on the stinging lathes of Detroit and Lansing at night
And shrieked at the torch in your secret parts and the amorous tests,
But now with your eyes that enter the future of roads you forget;
You are all instinct with your phosphorous glow and your streaking hair.

And now when we stop it is not as the bird from the shell that I leave
Or the leathery pilot who steps from his bird with a sneer of delight,
And not as the ignorant beast do you squat and watch me depart,
But with exquisite breathing you smile, with satisfaction of love,
And I touch you again as you tick in the silence and settle in sleep.

 

[DGS49]

Intangible is not rational. "I want to drive an M-B because it confers status." That perceived status or "what my car says about me," is intangle (not quantifiable), and it is not rational. Rational implies quantitative.

It used to be that a 3-series Beemer was perceived to have a better resale value than a Caddy of comparable MSRP. That is a rational factor, though intangible. More recently, people have realized that that is simply not the case. Beemers only have good resale value when you trade them on more expensive Beemers; if you sell them outright or trade them on something else, not so much.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Intangible is not rational. "I want to drive an M-B because it confers status." That perceived status or "what my car says about me," is intangle (not quantifiable), and it is not rational. Rational implies quantitative.

It used to be that a 3-series Beemer was perceived to have a better resale value than a Caddy of comparable MSRP. That is a rational factor, though intangible. More recently, people have realized that that is simply not the case. Beemers only have good resale value when you trade them on more expensive Beemers; if you sell them outright or trade them on something else, not so much.

Facts not in evidence.

Go to KBB and look up the trade in versus private buyer values for BMW 3-series. They are worth more to sell to sell to private buyers because dealers always offer less so they can make a profit reselling them.