In 2002, GM reinvented Cadillac. The brand’s edgy new “Arts and Science” look reflected a clean break with the sagging fortunes of the former “Standard of the World.” Unlike Ford, which consigned its Lincoln brand to badge-engineered boredom, GM declared its determination to re-establish Cadillac’s lost luster. The world’s largest automaker’s premium brand unleashed a raft of new products, a last-ditch, all-out fight against the relentless erosion of its large luxury car business. A five year report card is overdue. First, a quick recap…
By 2001, sales at GM’s erstwhile money-printing division had plummeted 60 percent from their historic highs. The average buyer’s age was at 65 and dropping (as in dropping dead). Though the Escalade luxury SUV (introduced in 1999) proved to be a highly profitable beast, Cadillac knew it couldn’t stake its future on the fickle whims of badge crazed blingmobilers.
Since The General has been unable to build small cars profitably since, um, ever, the company also knew that the Cadillac brand represented a mission-critical large passenger car profit center. So GM dedicated their new high-end Sigma rear wheel-drive platform exclusively to a line of premium sedans (CTS, STS) and a crossover (SRX). With lots of bragging about Nürburgring chassis fettling, the BMW 3-Series fighter CTS was the first out of the box.
The press gave the CTS rave reviews. After a sluggish start, sales peaked in 2005 at 61k units. Sales in ’06 are off 11 percent. Year-to-date (YTD) ’07 they’re down 27 percent. Anticipation of the redesigned ’08 CTS is keeping some intenders’ powder dry, but it’s clear the model still hasn’t found its happy place.
The mid-size STS peaked in its first full year (never a good sign). In 2005, Caddy dealers moved just 33k units. In 2006, sales dropped 23%. For ‘07, YTD sales are down by 16%. GM is depending on a major STS interior upgrade to save the day, but it’s probably too late.
Sales of Ye Olde front wheel-drive DTS (formerly DeVille) continue their perpetual free-fall. From 2001 through 2006, they’ve sunk some 40 percent. In 2007, YTD sales are off 26 percent.
The SRX seems to be stuck in the low 20k sales range– despite the fact that crossovers are supposedly the hot vehicle segment in the current US market. The stealth-fighter inspired XLR folding hardtop coupe is literally invisible, with sales below 4k per year. In lockstep with the rest of the family, XLR sales were down 15 percent in 2006, and a whopping 50 percent in 2007 YTD.
After suspension tuning the CTS at the ‘Ring, GM convinced themselves they had enough street cred for a major European sales assault. Two years ago, GM established CCHE (Cadillac Corvette Hummer Europe). The unit’s modest sales goals: 20k units by 2010. The Saab-based, compact, diesel-available BLS was pegged as the volume seller.
The BLS was DOA. With Euro-‘Slades sucking up high test at to the tune of $200+ per tank, racking-up fuel costs that approach $1 per mile, it’s no surprise GM’s adopted a low volume, high mark-up strategy for their rapaciously thirsty gangstamobile. Pitching the $90k, badge-engineered GMT900 Yukon against similarly-priced, highly evolved, deeply admired Bimmers, Mercs, Rovers, Porsches, etc. has been about as successful as you’d expect.
Despite (or because of) the introduction of the Hummer H3 to the Eurozone, the CCHE operation’s projections are downwardly-moving targets. Independent analysts are projecting no more than six to eight thousand sales by 2010. Check back in six months.
Stateside, it’s clear Caddy’s domestic ops have been crippled by a bad case of beancounteritis. The Sigma triplets were handicapped from the git-go by their sub-par interiors. Initial pricing was overly ambitious. And the “Art and Science” design motif failed to seduce young up-and-comers.
And after the one-two-three CTS, STS and SRX splash, the product pipeline has dried up. The foreign competition is running circles around Caddy with a proliferation of variants. The New York Auto Show will offer a glimpse at some long overdue relief: a new 300hp, 3.6-liter V6 for the STS and CTS, a new CTC (a CTS coupe) and CTS-V and a V12-powered Mercedes fighter.
Prototypes of Caddy’s top-of-the-line luxobarge are running on a widened version of GM’s Zeta architecture (a.k.a. Holden Commodore / Pontiac G8). We’ll soon know if the new Caddy has the 16 Concept’s style. We’ll eventually learn if it can withstand the nickel-and-diming that stripped its predecessors of competitive appeal.
Of course, Cadillac is right to develop a higher high end sedan. Every Mercedes C-Class driver thinks (or imagines) that there’s some S-Class in his ride. Without a proper top-line model, denied credible conquesting Euro-fighters, Cadillac has quietly descended into Buick’s old territory: a semi-premium brand, with discount pricing to match.
Cadillac’s new products can’t come soon enough. Literally. If this year’s sales trends continue, 2007 Cadillac sales will be right back where they were in 2001.
Update: STS did not get as much as an interior upgrade as hoped, the Chinese SLS interior has not been exported back to the Tubes. Cadillac’s loss.
Why SRX sales have been in the dumps is beyond me, besides that bad launch. Not everyone reads Consumer Reports and its filled-in black circles, right?
“The press gave the CTS rave reviews. After a sluggish start, sales peaked in 2005 at 61k units. Sales in ’06 are off 11 percent. Year-to-date (YTD) ’07 they’re down 27 percent. Anticipation of the redesigned ’08 CTS is keeping some intenders’ powder dry, but it’s clear the model still hasn’t found its happy place.”
This may be a little uncharitable. CTS sales rose every year since introduction, a notable accomplishment.
Please clarify on the comment “the model [CTS] has still not found its happy place”. Following as it did a qualifier about the upcoming ’08, is this pure conjecture?
GM’s new DI 3.6L V6 only outputs 298HP, at least in the 2008 STS. GM has caught up with the competition, but in true GM style, they have not exceeded the competition.
Also regarding the rumoured GM V12, Bob “the Putz” Lutz confidently proclaimed that the V12 was being developed by Holden in Australia. And just recently, Holden’s top exec replied that “there is no such thing”. He went on to say Holden isn’t making any sort of V12, and isn’t working on any Cadillac drivetrains or platforms. Just when you think GM has improved … Holden’s top exec and Lutz aren’t even aware of exactly what’s going on within the company. Incompetence at it’s finest.
*IF* this V12 rumour is true, then it’s certainly not being developed by Holden.
The 2008 STS has just been revealed, and it’s a major dissapointment. For reasons unknown, GM did not give it the same great interior as the SLS in China.
Given their starting point in 2001, it was always going to be difficult task to turn things around with the first generation of products. Part of the problem has been the continuing dilution of the brand with re-badged Chevy trucks and SUVs. While the GMT900 platform is very good, nobody wants to pay $60K for a Tahoe with leather and a Cadillac badge.
They have, however, done much better with the cars. The art and science design has created an instantly recognizable and modern looking car (as opposed to awkward looking SUVs). The mechanicals were also acceptable for its class and the service, according to JD Power, is outstanding. Where they really bombed was with the cheap interiors that plague so many other GM products.
I hope that GM will show the commitment to the (still strong) Cadillac brand that it deserves and delivers quality interiors and incremental style and mechanical upgrades with their next iteration. If not they’ll degenerate into yet another wannabe luxury brand like Lincoln, Acura and Infinity.
86er: CTS sales are less than half of it’s primary competitor, BMW 3 series.
That’s may not seem so bad, but the real problem is that the rest of the models are weak. That means total Caddy sales volumes are about back to where they were before the whole new push began.
In order for Cadillac to succeed, either the CTS is going to have to be a 100k volume car, or the other models need to have an upward trajectory, not downwards, as is currently the case.
To me, the 2008 CTS looks less than “all new” by far. It looks like a nose job, some other face-lifting, and an improved interior. The 2008 CTS may lift sales back to where they were in ’05, but it’s hard to see it improving on that.
Johnson,
See GM Death Watch 113 further down the list of editorials. Clearly the very upper management of GM is clueless.
I think that Holden is indeed working on platform development for North America. I don’t have a clue about the V12.
Looks like pretty soon GM and Ford will not be doing ANY product development in Detroit.
And personally, I think that 298 HP is pretty impressive out of 3.6 NA liters. Back in the day they used to brag about “A HP per cubic inch” which is equivalent to 61 HP/liter. Without no emmisions requirements whatsoever.
Right three times, but all this has been going on forever. It’s more than just Cadillac.
>>unable to build small cars profitably since, um, ever,
>Pitching the $90k, badge-engineered GMT900 Yukon against similarly-priced, highly evolved, deeply admired [European cars]…
>the “Art and Science” design motif failed to seduce young up-and-comers.
Caddy needs to sell as many CTS’ as BMW 3-Series? I’m sorry, I don’t think so. BMW would die without the 3. I don’t think you could say the same about the CTS and Cadillac.
As for the rest of the line. The XLR is off (I would hazard to guess that happens to all vehicles of its ilk). Escalades are doing fine too. As for the SRX and STS, yes they were weakish efforts. Let’s see how they evolve before writing them off just yet.
You have also tended to use stats to base your argument that Caddy is in deep trouble. Other stats might counter this (ie. buyer demo has gotten much younger since 2001, dealer satisfaction is through the roof and I would strongly disagree with your assertion that the product pipe is empty).
Nice try, but as far as the “truth” goes, this article is only half of it.
How come every redesign is not “all new” but just a refresh here on TTAC?
1/2 of the 3 series isnt bad considering it is only a sedan. 3 series has wagon, coupe and convertible, sounds pretty resonable. Now for the rest of the line up…
CSJohnston: The CTS was 40% of Caddy’s 2006 passenger car sales. I think it’s very fair to say that without the CTS, Cadillac would be in deep doo-doo.
tones03: Take a good look at it, covering up the new grill. Does it look “all-new” to you? It sure doesn’t to me.
I guess yes and no, still has the sharp lines and close the the same feature lines as before, but they added some much needed new ones, and I still cant get over the refreshed interior, and rear end. That is me though, I can see how you would call it a refresh.
I’d like to think I’m a “young up and comer” (31, recently married, VP level, currently in an MBA program).
I’d say the arts & sciences motif has seduced me, definitely. CTS and CTS-V are definitely on the list of possibles when I finish up school.
Again, I’m probably not a good test case. I love Cadillacs, always have. I thought the Caterra was total crap, but the CTS-V…hey now.
Maybe I’m a jerk but, as much as I like the 3, I like the CTS/CTS-V because it’s NOT a 3. It’s different.
Whatever. I like Arts & Sciences. I’m biased to begin with. Interested to see what the 08 makeover looks like.
Paul: I was about to rebutt but was beaten to the punch by some other posters re: CTS wagons, coupes, convertibles. While not discounting the uphill climb, I think Cadillac can be encouraged by the reception the CTS received in a fiercely competitive “compact luxury sport” segment with two highly established and entrenched rivals in the C-Class and 3-Series.
To me, and maybe only to me, I don’t see the CTS as being direct competition to the 3-series. Yes, I know that’s what the pundits and Cadillac aimed for, but to me the CTS is a totally different kind of car. And not just in terms of dimensions and ride quality. With the upcoming ’08, I think Cadillac is moving the CTS even further away from competition with the 3 and more into 5-Series territory.
Of course, I am referring to recent discussion of the BLS or some such successor being slotted in below the CTS as a more appropriate entry-level offering.
I forgot, they also pushed out the wheels and flared the wheel openings.
BTW, have you looked the new STS refresh? Ouch!
As someone else noted, the front looks like the Griswald’s “Family Truckster” from “Vacation”. Just needs some fake wood on the sides.
Paul,
The CTS is important to Cadillac but not in the way the 3-Series is for BMW. I would also say that for a first serious effort, the CTS performed admirably. No one ever thought it would be the segment leader. Additionally, the last two years have not offered too much in the way of new variants (aside from a sport appearance package). I think if you look at all models of cars like the CTS (3-Series, C-Class, G35, A4, etc) or really any product, sales are directly related to the age of the vehicle. Cadillac did the right thing and made minor changes to the existing model and spent their scarce resource dollars on the next gen unit.
Cadillac sales of the CTS will likely pick up with the new model and they will grow the line with niche products like the wagon and coupe.
I have read that the SRX is likely gone and a new crossover will come in. I would guess that the new one will be more in line with the popular CUV’s like the MDX, RX330 and so on.
STS refresh is crap…can tell GM is killing it, they put more effort into the SRX. The China SLS is a sweet interior. STS is an alright interior, but not at $50k
CSJohnston: You haven’t explained why the CTS is not important to Cadillac “in the way the 3 series is for BMW”
Both the CTS and 3 series are the overwhelming volume leaders for both companies, and represent the entry level for the brands. As that, they play a mission-critical, and similar role to both companies.
What vehicle is important to Cadillac, if not the CTS? The DTS?
The previous CTS was a good start. The 08 looks quite promising and is instantly recognizable and a distinctive style. When it’s released this summer/fall it should do quite well. Also keep in mind as was said above the 3 series is sedan, wagon, convertible and coupe with a mix of RWD and AWD. The CTS was RWD sedan only with a hotted up CTS-V variant (like the M3). Cadi should bring out a coupe and convertible CTS. They should also make a smaller version of the CTS as it seems more on par size-wise to a 5 series than a 3 series (BMW is bringing a coupe and cabrio 1 series to the sates). And why not a wagon or sportback version of the CTS?
The Cadi turnaround has been quite an achievement, we’ll see if they can continue it.
Is it just my connection or has TTAC been running slower than dirt lately?
Sid Vicious, it’s been painfully clear to me for a long time now that current GM management (just like a lot of past GM management) is clueless. It just boggles my mind how there is no noticeable improvement in sight, and how management is seemingly content with running the corporation into the ground.
As for the DI 3.6L V6, by itself, it’s certainly impressive compared to engines “back in the day”. But the problem is, this is reality, and we must compare GM’s engine to the competition. For example, BMW’s 3.0L TT engine makes 300HP and 300 lb-ft torque. The GM engine is outclassed. Infiniti’s 3.5L V6 VQ engine outputs 306HP and 268 lb-ft in the G35 sedan. The upcoming G37 Coupe gets a 3.7L V6 which makes 330HP and 270 lb-ft torque. The Lexus DI 3.5L V6 makes 306HP and 277 lb-ft. GM has caught up to the competition, but certainly not exceeded it.
Emissions-wise, both Infiniti engines are LEV-2, the Lexus engine is ULEV-II, and it’s not yet known the emissions ratings for the BMW or GM engine.
Call me a young up-and-comer, but I LIKE the 2008 CTS.
If I was ever the type to get an actual luxury sport sedan, the idea of “5-series BMW with 3 series price and cool looks” that is the CTS would definatly appeal to me.
Rented a near-stripped CTS one time, it was a nice car (not fantastic, but definatly nice), but the new version looks so much better executed.
Paul, a few points:
– First of all, what GM and Lutz have succeeded in doing in the past 5 years is making Cadillac RELEVANT, which it wasn’t to any American under 65.
– Two, the CTS is not as important to Cadillac as the 3 is to BMW because Cadillac has Escalade sales to buoy it, at a much higher price level, with very little unique engineering cost.
– Three, compare the CTS to its competitors: the Infiniti G, the Lexus GS, the Acura TL, and Lincoln LS/Jaguar S. In that company, Cadillac sales are strong, and the CTS has better momentum.
– Four, the Cadillac design theme is unique and attractive, esp. on the CTS and XLR (just look at the raves for its styling in the comments under RF’s review). About what competitor have design reviews been so favorable? Surely not BMW or Lexus.
– Finally, I’ll grant you that Caddy is a mess in Europe. But I think they are on the path to eventually hitting 300K per annum in sales in the US, which would put them on par with the Big 3.
Five years ago, none of this seemed remotely possible.
Being 26, I would say I’m not a typical Cadillac shopper, but one of those shoppers they are aiming for with the CTS. The current CTS I considered a couple years ago, because it was a stylish, RWD, 5 spd, 255 hp V6. A great package on paper. However, reality was quite different. Cheap interior and poor design inside offset the great design outside.
Glad to see the new CTS has evolved to feature an even more stunning exterior and a stylish, ergonomic, and tight interior.
More power doesn hurt either.
Way to go Cadillac. Evolution, not revolution. Keep whats good, fix whats bad.
Let’s tone down the GM optimism a bit, and be more realistic.
CTS sales have been good, but at what cost? Price-wise, the CTS has been a 3 Series/Infinit G/Lexus IS competitor. Size-wise, the 1st gen CTS isn’t quite 5 Series or Lexus GS size, although the new CTS should a lot closer. And while it’s true CTS sales have remained relatively good, at what cost did those sales come? For over a year now, Cadillac has been using heavy incentives to sell the CTS. Can’t say the same about the Lexus GS, as Lexus uses virtually no incentives at all, and BMW has been using less incentives on it’s 5 Series.
Escalade sales are certainly not enough to stabilize Cadillac sales, if the CTS did not exist.
And I don’t see the relevance that Cadillac has among young people. Sales are going down, and the only two models that young people are even aware of are the CTS and Escalade.
But Johnson, if you were in the market for a $35K sedan, would you consider the ’08 CTS? You would NEVER have considered a Catera or Cimaron in years past.
Remember, it took Infiniti 25 years to get where it is today (smaller than Cadillac). In a lot of respects, Cadillac was starting from nothing just 5 years ago. With many younger consumers, the brand had negative value.
Paul,
To clarify. I assert that if the 3-Series fails to remain the overwhelming volume leader for BMW, then BMW is in dire financial trouble. That car represents such an overwhelming percentage of their US and global sales that any hiccup in its sales and profitability hurts BMW in a way that a slow-selling CTS does not to GM.
It would be like GM losing sales of Silverados, Sierras and full-size SUV’s… oh wait.
I would say that Cadillac has 1-2 (maybe three models if you inlcude the Escalade) to spread its joy and pain over and finally, Cadillac is a division of a much larger entity, it can suffer through bad patches… like it has and still exist.
To further CSJohnsons’s point, I would posit that while the 3 series shares its platform only with the X3 (and partly the 1), the DTS shares its platform with the Lucerne and the Escalade shares a platform with a dozen other GM models. So a downturn in one of those products doesn’t knock out GM the way BMW would be hurt by losing sales of the 3.
“Johnson: Let’s tone down the GM optimism a bit”
Yes, God forbid.
If anything, I would say the DTS is Cadillac’s other cash-cow in the profitable livery market.
I have heard that the CTS is important to GM as a “conquest” vehicle and that many CTS buyers are moving “up” from Accords and Camrys. I don’t see it myself, but I guess it’s possible.
SherbornSean,”path to 300k sales”. Not according to the current sales momentum. Unless it takes a major turn, they’re right back to 2001, with a 140k in passenger car sales.
Can anybody tell me what the the Cadillac nomenclauture is supposed to mean? Is there any system to it? A 3-series, an A5, a Mazda 6, a Citroen C3: I can tell what they are trying to say. But CTS, XLR-V, DTS, SRS, STS: it’s all alphabet soup to me.
Except of the course the BLS, which we Europeans call bacon-lettuce-salami, when we are not using the more appropriate term BuLS***. I saw this nasty little Cad a few years ago in Geneva and though I liked its sharp lines, the interior gave me ennui. This spring I looked at it again and the interior was as horrible as ever. Now however they are offering a BLS station wagon, a.k.a. the only Cadillac station wagon ever that cannot be used as a hearse. Since dead-people transport is out, I wonder who might buy it.
Let’s tone down the GM optimism a bit, and be more realistic.
Why?We dont seem to place this practice regularly with other manufactures.Evolution within a brand has shown to work.
Escalade sales are certainly not enough to stabilize Cadillac sales, if the CTS did not exist.
True,the exodus from SUV’s has made an effect,however its wrong to assume caddys sales would force a collapse considering caddy has had a small sedan in the line up for 15 plus years.
all that money spent on so many different models and 140,000 sales. what was wrong was keeping the deville as the dts. Instead they need a volume mass appeal large car that replaces the DTS (otherwise known as deville). This luxury liner would have to appeal to the old caddy buyer and the converts and sell over 100,000 units. All of this proliferation of stuff and no one caddy says come hither to me.
jerry weber:
Well exactly. It’s the same old ADD. We’re failing so… let’s try something new!
Cadillac should have three models, max. And they should keep working on them until they’re the best damn models in the world. The standard of the world.
The “new” CTS is a step in the right direction.
Martin,
Caddy’s alphnumeric badges mean absolutely nothing. It is a marketing ploy as some genius thought that it would help to ape the Europeans with their cool, ultramodern nomeclature. The same genius also worked at Lexus, Acura, Audi and Infiniti. He or she now works at Lincoln.
Although Sedan de Ville doesn’t set my heart on fire, at least I know what I am buying!
Kill the marketing staff! Oh wait… I’m in marketing!
Damn.
Martin,
Cadillac first started using the alpha designations as special versions of existing models. The DTS was the Deville Touring Sedan, the STS was the Seville Touring Sedan and so on. My favorite was the Eldorado Touring Coupe… called the ETC. As they tried to project a more European image and brought new models on line, they dropped the model names in favor of the abberviations.
Paul,
Cadillac certainly won’t be at 300K in annual US sales for a while. But in time, I would expect 100K from the CTS (including coupe and crossover variants), 60K from the large sedan (DTS/STS), 60K from the Escalade, 40K from a RWD BLS and 40K from a crossover version (X3/RDX competitor).
That’s 300K, without counting the XLR or rumored V12 superluxury sedan.
I am not sure what the carping is all about with the refreshed STS. Perhaps you all have better photos to look at (I went to edmunds) but I saw it as a logical step. I liked what I have seen in the new CTS so I like the look of the STS.
As for the interior, I also like it. It’s simple. Not Apple simple but very clean. No mixing board of buttons on the dash, no iDrive (iHope) and an uncluttered instrument panel. I would think I would have to wait to see how it looks/smells/feels in person to form a somewhat educated opinion.
I give Caddy credit for their efforts with the new Sigma cars; it certainly stands out compared to Lincoln. Too bad it wasn’t quite up to snuff the first time. GM always seem to have to play catch-up.
One problem I see is that that they started from the bottom. Lexus started with the top model, the original 400LS, a fine car (and a better Cadillac). They then filled out the range downwards. The LS set the standard for what Lexus stood for.
Caddy’s three volume models are the CTS, DTS and Escalade. What unified image do they present? I don’t see a consistant image here.
A new top-line V12 could help substantially, but I worry if it’s image will be tarnished a bit if its know to be riding on an extended platform shared with the upcoming G8 and Impala. That could be a stretch, literally.
Image: what does Caddy want to be? A BMW/Infinity sport fighter or a Lexus. Or something different?
I think some potential buyers may be turned off by the ‘Slade image. How would Mercedes look if they sold a tarted up Dodge Durango as their top SUV?
Its funny how everyone on these blogs (be it foreign support or domestic support) fall into blindly believing in ‘trueism’ or incomplete truths. The first models of the CTS and SRX had pretty good interiors. If you step away from how they looked, aesthetically, they where well constructed and used fairly expensive materials. GM was attempting to mimic Japanese levels of perceived quality but by using a polar opposition, angular design theme. Turns out people didn’t like it, doesn’t mean it was cheap. Most of Cadillacs switch gear is unique. Also another misnomer -in the comments- the DTS is Cadillacs perennial bread winner, followed by the Escalade which has gained in sales, despite the SUV slump. Also, for those of you who think the 08 CTS isn’t ‘new’ its on a brand new platform (sigma II) which will be unique only to the CTS and its variants, much like BMW’s 3. The model has all new 6 speed transmissions auto/man, all new switch gear, newly designed and unique seats, all new sheet-meal,a new engine, revised suspension, and a new method in constructing and wielding the unit-bodied exterior with lasers, etc. The CTS is the next fork in the road for rebuilding Cadillacs image around the world. With this car, Caddy will have less trouble in pitching the 2010 RWD DTS, 2012 XLR, CTC, CTS-wagon, BRX, and ultimately the V12 XLS.
I think some potential buyers may be turned off by the ‘Slade image. How would Mercedes look if they sold a tarted up Dodge Durango as their top SUV?
Paul,
I’m not sure. Ask Porsche.
Working against the negative brand equity (among young “up-and-comers,” anyway) that Cadillac had amassed by the early ’00s, it’s amazing that Cadillac was able to sell half as many CTSs as BMW sells 3-Series.
Equally amazing was that this mix of memorable styling and adequately competitive engineering was launched in the same era as the Aztek. Just when I was convinced that GM couldn’t take a risk unless it was justified by half-assed cost-cutting, the CTS proved me wrong.
Cadillac’s current issue is that, to keep the buzz going, the brand needed another sweeping revision this year or last. Judged against Caddy’s get-serious marketing talk and our own elevated expectations, their current lineup of couple-year-old “almost” cars is beginning to grate.
Moreover, the heralded “Standard of the World” tagline still doesn’t apply, in that even the promising ’08 CTS doesn’t offer any outstanding qualities or features unique to the class. If anyone should be pushing gimmicky-but-innovative gadgets like iDrive, it’s Caddy, not the Germans.
Or are we letting our expectations exceed reason?
So far as I can tell there is a bad odor hanging over nearly every GM product – the almost continual bad news, poor or average product reviews, idiot statements from management create a really negative backdrop for anyone stepping into a dealership.
BMW and MB found that bigger wasn’t always better, it’s way past time for GM to be broken up into 3 or 4 corporations so the various companies can focus on their core strengths.
There’s no good reason for a maker of pickup trucks, a korean small car company and the Z06 to be under one roof. Imagine an independent Pontiac/Holden or Saturn/Opel or a Corvette corporation free to develop into a US version of Porsche.
Someone call Kerkorian and Icahn quick we need someone to drive a stake thru GMs heart.
I didn’t realize Cadillac is doing so poorly until I read this article. Then I realized how few Caddies I see on the road. The CTS and Escalade are fairly common sights, but I doubt I’ve seen more than two each DTS and SRX models.
I made a point of dropping by a Cadillac dealership. One could literally fire a cannon through the place and not hit a soul. The Infiniti store had a few customers, and the Lexus emporium was downright busy.
We are still concerned about Cadillac reliability and resale value so we won’t be back.
carguy said: “I hope that GM will show the commitment to the (still strong) Cadillac brand that it deserves and delivers quality interiors and incremental style and mechanical upgrades with their next iteration. If not they’ll degenerate into yet another wannabe luxury brand like Lincoln, Acura and Infinity.”
Might want to peek in your Caddy’s rear-view mirror; an Acura may be gaining on you…
Cadillac sales vs. Acura sales, by year:
Year: Caddy: Acura: Cadillac advantage:
2002 199,748 165,552 +34,196 or 20.65%
2003 216,090 170,918 45,172 or 26.43%
2004 234,217 198,919 35,298 or 17.74%
2005 235,002 209,610 25,392 or 12.11%
2006 227,014 201,223 25,791 or 12.81%
Sources: GM and Honda Websites.
CSJohnston: Whether you like the Cayenne or not, at least it’s not sitting on a pick-up truck chassis. That’s the point I was trying to make.
Cadillac’s problem in the luxury market?
Why should I buy a car from a brand that’s trying to catch up, when I can get one from a brand that’s already there?
If the Cadillac division of The General is to survive it must become a true worldwide marque. That means something no larger than the CTS and, preferably, even a bit smaller. And given that any Cadillac people wanted, in the States or elsewhere, had a great engine, that must be part of the package.
Whenever Cadillac tried a smaller car, the results were disastrous because of the starting point. Even those of us who are old enough to have clear memories of the Cimarron of the early Eighties have purged it from our memories, as best we can. The idea of taking a Chevrolet Cavalier and trying to make it into a competitor for the BMW 3-series might seem absurd now, but it was welcomed by no less than Car and Driver, at the time. (So maybe the idea of selling out to advertisers is less new than we think.)
Then, in the late Nineties there was the Catera, which a television commercial tried to sell as the good-handling Cadillac, by using a duck to indicate that it was capable of manuevering through cones – “the Caddy that zigs.” It was a goofy ad for a mediocre car whose starting point, as I recall, was the GM platform of that time, from Europe. (The mediocrity lay in the execution, fit and finish of the Catera, versus the Eldorado, STS and even Deville, of the time.)
The challenge of coming up with a Cadillac which will excite Europeans and Asian customers is enormous, admittedly. But the division is doomed, if it thinks that the ‘slade or that silly rebadged Avalanche can continue to keep them afloat.
So someone at The General has to understand that it is time to fish or cut bait.
Infiniti’s 25 year history? Time to dust off those history books. Infiniti first came to market in 1989, which makes the brand only 17 years old. Lexus also came to market in 1989. Guess which brand is more successful right now.
Cadillac has been around for many decades, and GM threw away Cadillac’s reputation and prestige through bone-headed decisions and all-around incompetence.
SherbornSean, expecting Cadillac to hit 300K sales in the future is overly optimistic, and also unknown. It’s futile to make such predictions, and based on all current information, even the biggest GM fans and loyalists would not be predicting 300K US sales for Cadillac. Will it happen in a decade, or two, or three? Too much uncertainty to predict that.
i could say caddy has only 4 models. if a company has four models, you can`t hope for sales of millions.secondly, cadillac understands that they can`t built quality, if it is built in usa, so they borrow as much as possible. the 3,6L is actually german built opel engine, the chassis and platforms they use are taken from opel omega( 94 to date) , whether stretched or not. and cts sits atop vectra platform. srx is on omega, as well sts,. xlr is on corvette floorpan.so xlr could be called american having the northstar engine and in-house floorpan. dts is a retard deville that has not been polite enough to die its own death. can`t count as a model, because ia supect sts was built as a replacement for it. escalade- well, you know all about it. leaf springs and oak veneer all over the place. chevy in a neck tie.
what to do?
buy audi, and don`t pick noses, but pick the finish in audi, and you will feel jobless there. then go to your engineers and tell them that none of them leaves factory sooner than a dog tick could get stuck in between any of two parts inside any caddy.
2. be american. hyundai can make a brand new v8 . can`t you? once you stepped on the surface of the moon. koreans haven`t. so I guess…you could. don`t borrow. create. use – in house platforms, not opels, that are considered in europe the cheapest brand possible from european manufacturers.
3. add new models. add, not rebadge or simulate.
4. add new models on time. change generations every 5-7 years, generations, not grilles.
5. update watching your competitors, not gen-x wallets, or your neighbours chevy cavalier.
6. pour into R&D. non-stop. 24-7. no holidays. r&d. gratify with bonuses achievements, not ambitions.
Terry: If Caddilac’s success hinges on breaking the euro market, they’re screwed. No one here (eg England, Italy, France) would consider driving a Caddillac, apart from for their comedy value. Seriously. You wouldn’t know they sold them over here at all. And, btw, vehicle tax here in the UK just shot up on new cars with large (read >2litre) engines to something like $700-800 a year. Luxo-barge is not the product you want to be breaking into this market with.
Johnson,
Fair enough 17 years for Infiniti. Still a long time. My point is only that Cadillac has come a long way in the last 5-6 years, apparently adding 80K in annual sales to 220K. Why is it impossible to think they could repeat that performance over the next 5-6 years and hit 300K?
Look at Lexus, BMW and Acura sales over the last 5 years — the increases have been on the backs of crossovers. In sedans, Acura is sucking wind. I don’t think it is complete fantasy to think that a well executede $30K RWD BLS and a $35K AWD crossover based on it could achieve 40K in annual sales each.
Furthermore, a large $50K RWD luxury sedan replacing both the STS and DTS would increase sales, as both cars are “close, but no cigar” today.
Paul,
You say that Lexus started with the LS, starting at the top. Yes, the LS of today costs $70K, but 17 years ago, it was $30K. Even after accounting for price inflation, the point is that Lexus has moved the LS upscale — it used to be an inexpensive E-class copy, and now its an expensive 7-series copy. A year later, they brought over the ES250, which was obviously nothing more than a Camry with leather. At least the ES330 today is somewhat differentiated.
To Stein X: I guess it would be because the car from the company catching up puts out a product that passes what’s “already there”.
It’s a common complaint that the domestics hit (or miss) where the imports are now, rather than where they WILL BE. When the new import comes out, barring a huge mistake on their part, it sells better than the domestic, and they’re right back where they started.
When the others talk about the 3-Series being more important to BMW than the CTS to Cadillac, I think it rings true. BMW sold 274,432 autos last year, and 120,180 of them were 3-Series. That’s 43.79% of their yearly sales. Cadillac sold 227,014 autos, and 54,846 were CTSs, which is only 24.16% of their total sales. That’s a big difference.
Still, even though Caddy isn’t as dependent on one model, that doesn’t give them license to half-ass it. Especially since that could change. The DTS sold less in 2006 than the DTS/Deville did in ’05. The Escalade is doing well, but I don’t think that’s where the smart money is. I’m waiting to see how it fares during the summer/fall months. I doubt that the “bit of wood and metal” MCE the STS got will stop its sales slide. So, the CTS could become more important every year.
CSJohnston: Whether you like the Cayenne or not, at least it’s not sitting on a pick-up truck chassis. That’s the point I was trying to make.
Paul,
I like the Cayenne just fine.
Sorry. I did not get that from the comment. I thought you were saying that the Escalade was somehow inferior because it was built on a platform designed to be used on more plebian vehicles.
As for that platform being a ladder frame versus a unibody frame, that’s a whole other kettle of fish and we can debate the merits of both. However, I don’t think a well-designed ladder frame is somehow a “lesser” platform.
Cadillac’s problem in the luxury market?
Why should I buy a car from a brand that’s trying to catch up, when I can get one from a brand that’s already there?
Pardon? If this is the logic for a purchase decision then Lexus, BMW, Audi, Acura and others should not exist.
WHen the first-gen CTS came out, Caddy had some set up at the Amelia Island Concours.
The car was mobbed by people my age (30-40’s). Every single one of us came away discouraged…we really wanted to like it, but the interior was a complete disaster. Just total crap. You could see folks running up to check it out, and the look in their eyes when they sat down in the front seat and just…gave up on Cadillac. The discussion around the car was, “How could they build such junk and expect car guys to buy it?”
The new CTS is probably better, but GM’s lost all those people who moved on. They probably won’t reconsider the CTS.
Which is GM’s problem in a nutshell. The original LS400 was a great car, and a bargain against the 7 Series and the S-Class Benz. It stood on its own and had impeccable quality. GM builds 90% cars, then tries to improve them the second time around, when they’ve already driven the target market to other brands.
I sat in the new GMC Acadia a the ATL auto show recently. Nice, but the interior was not up to snuff. Oh, it LOOKED great, but in the flesh it was definitely below par compared to the Acura MDX or even the new Mazda CX-9. The inerior bits gave me the feeling that they’d look good for about 2-3 years, then they’d just start falling apart. Close, but close isn’t good enough any more. My wife, a diehard Honda girl, even said she really wanted to check out the Acadia. I was shocked. After sitting in it, she said, “It’s OK, but not enough to get me out of a Honda. Everything feels like it’ll fall apart by the end of the warranty.” Another $40K sale lost for GM. She’s now eagerly awaiting the new Pilot.
One other thing I noticed. The car show was not very well attended at all. Not like past years. It was Saturday afternoon, and it was not very crowded at all. I suspect this says something anecdotally about where car sales are headed. And the domestics were ghost towns. Toyota, Honda, Acura, Lexus, Infinity, all were at least busy.
Zarba,
Don’t ocunt Caddy out quite yet. 40 year old guys with $35K to spend on a car (or, more acurately, $500/month) are quite fickle. Today it’s a G35, but 3 years ago it was an A6 and next year, who knows. All you need is to have a hot car, and you’re fine.
Of course, if the ’08 CTS still isn’t as good as the G37/ES330/TL, then I’ll start to see the glass as half empty too.
Something timely from MSN Autos…the headline today reads: ‘Cadillac to Build V12-Powered Rear-Drive Flagship – New Super Sedan Inspired by Sixteen Concept’. My first response to this is ‘oh really, let’s see’. The second is that concept appeared in 2003. Have never heard ‘strike while the iron is hot’? It’s like the Camaro. They put the concept out there, and then follow it up with a convertible, years before the damn thing hits the market. And I can’t wait to see where that V12 springs from.
God, talk about bringing back bad memories. The Cimmaron epitomizes GMs dark ages. It has become almost as much of an automotive punchline as the Pinto and the Vega. And that Catera advertising was just so clueless…cartoon characters peddling a new luxury car.
The extent to which GM lost it’s way is truly something to behold.
Don’t forget about Cindy Crawford in thigh high leather S&M boots — that caused a stir.
Zarba: The look of a Honda interior and the new Lambdas interior look and feel the same. I went and checked out the Lambdas and all their competion at NAIAS and i was impressed with the lambdas and not impressed with the toyotas or koreans, hondas were equal to them, they all use plastic everywhere that looks good on camera but still is nothing special in person.
I bet no one could tell the difference in the 2 if they were blindfolded and said feel this, hear this sit in this, for different vehicles. Most of the time people go in having a bad impression before you start, people want GM to fail, so they will do everything they can to keep that mind set.
I for one love the new Cadillac – funny since according to many people here, at 23 years old I shouldn’t want to drive a Cadillac. I am eagerly anticipating the new CTS.
Paul Neidermeyer: You are upset that the 08 CTS isn’t “all new” in your opinion. So what do you feel about Porsche 911, any BMW, Jaguar XJ… I mean they’ve maintained a very consistent appearance over the last couple decades.
I don’t get why people complain about the new engine having “only” 298 hp while others are at 310, 320, etc. The gearing of the transmission will be more noticeable in its effect on the performance than that extra 15 hp that GM has decided is unnecessary. Besides, if there’s one thing GM knows how to do exceptionally well, it’s building engines. I will gladly give up that 15 hp for a GM built mill.
And what’s with everyone caring about interiors soooooo much. When I drive, I’ve got my ass in the seat, hands on the wheel, and feet on the pedals. I mean really, if you people are driving along do you look at the wood trim on the door and say “Damn, that wood trim is so nice!” or “Good thing I bought the Lexus because the carpeting in the trunk is awesome!” Maybe you people rap your knuckles on the dash every time you jump in to hear that solid thunk instead of a hollow sound in order to justify your purchase.
In MY opinion, I see the brands like this:
BMW 3: driven by unoriginal, copycat, image conscious d-bags. 7 series is the only BMW I would even consider owning (and that would be after the A8/S-class), if the funds were available. The “Ultimate Yuppie Machine.” Park it in the driveway of their brand new 5500 sq ft home on that .5 acre lot in “Maple Run” or “Oakwood Lane”.
Lexus: driven by boring non-car women who care more about the interior than anything else. “Hey, it costs a lot, and Consumer Reports says it’s go[o]d, so I bought one.” The upcoming LS600H does , however, interest me from a capability standpoint. I could do without the smug Lexus attitude.
M-B: they look great, and have a very impressive range to choose from, but I don’t want all the electronic gizmos. ABC, EBD, ARM, TIT, ASS, etc.
Audi: the Euro brand with the most exciting potential. Still not real common, but beginning to gain market share. Unique and understated — driven by people with similar attributes.
Lincoln: MKZ offers very nice equipment…. 265 hp on 87 octane, AWD, 6 speed trans. All for under $40k. I think anyone in the market for a premium sedan should check it out. Too bad the image perception and marketing will drive people to BMW and Lexus.
Cadillac: well, I’ve always had a thing for the pre-1970 Caddies (including the awesome V-16) and I love where the brand is going post-2000. Minimize the electronic wizardry. Don’t chase BMW or Lexus since the brand loyalty with those guys is EXTREME. Caddy just needs to produce stylish, powerful, unique automobiles. Something for someone who doesn’t want to be lumped in with the BMW and Lexus crowd.
Speedy well said, and I agree with most of it.
And what’s with everyone caring about interiors soooooo much… Maybe you people rap your knuckles on the dash every time you jump in to hear that solid thunk instead of a hollow sound in order to justify your purchase. It's the thought that if they cut corners on materials or did a bad job assembling what you CAN see and touch, what kind of corners did they cut and how did they assemble what you CAN'T see and touch?
“Frank Williams: It’s the thought that if they cut corners on materials or did a bad job assembling what you CAN see and touch, what kind of corners did they cut and how did they assemble what you CAN’T see and touch?”
When I worked for GM I was often told that the reason for the shoddy interiors was that they just plain ran out of development money once they reached the interior, thus the corner cutting.
I will leave it to someone more knowledgeable that I to reveal if corners were cut in the rest of the development process. Hopefully in what I was told it was implied that the rest of the vehicle is up to par.
(P.S. Anyone know how to italicize when you’re quoting someone?)
powertrain and safety corners will never be cut, and if they alloted xxx amount of money and spent 90% of it on powertrain and safety, well then looks are the first thing to go.
I’ll be shopping for a new car next year and the new CTS had been slated for a serious look. However, two recent events have dampened my enthusiasm.
First, my neighbor replaced his three-month old Escalade. The reason: Three transmission failures (stuck on the side of the road-type failures) in three months. When he tried to invoke the lemon law, the dealer claimed that each transmission failure had a different root-cause and therefore he did not qualify. Bad PR move. Cadillac did a great job of selling another new Lexus.
The second cause for pause occured when our VP replaced his every-option-available STS after only one year. Reason: Everything inside the car either rattled or squeaked. He also now has an every-option-available Lexus.
I have owned a bunch of BMW’s, an Audi S4, and three Mercedes and I know that they too have their problems. But, at least in my case, they were always small problems.
It is really too bad, I like the looks of the new CTS, especially the improved interior, but with so many good cars in this segment, I don’t feel the need to “risk” a GM purchase.
Someone on a earlier post mentioned that it was not the material quality of Cadillac interiors that was subpar but the execution.
On another note, can someone tell me why “hard” plastic is bad versus “soft” plastic? If the trim grain and colour match, does that not signify “attention to detail”? Can someone tell me if “soft” plastic lasts longer or cleans easier or is less resistant to solar damage?
Just thought I’d ask as long as we’re off topic.
“And what’s with everyone caring about interiors soooooo much… Maybe you people rap your knuckles on the dash every time you jump in to hear that solid thunk instead of a hollow sound in order to justify your purchase.”
Damn right!
If you’re dropping $40K on a new vehicle when perfectly competent ones are available for $20K, that car’s tactile qualities should remind you that it’s “worth” twice as much as an Accord. Otherwise, what’s the point of a luxury brand?
They dont’ update powertrains but once a decade how could they spend so much on them. And there safety record is not the best in the business, average at best. They cut corners on every aspect of the car, I have proof in the parking lot. Someone mentioned there engines are the best in the business, another laughable joke. They build junk engines and have been peddling them as great and innovative for the last 20 years when they are far from that. How come they can manage to make an inline 4, V6 and V8 over the last 2 decades that have the same problem of not running properly and turning off and they aren’t even similar designs.
“And what’s with everyone caring about interiors soooooo much… .”
I think it’s two things. One, a lot of people think back to older GM products that were not very good and any similarities, even trivial ones, make people think that perhaps things haven’t changed enough.
And, depending on the vehicle (and I am not thinking of Cadillac specifically) the materials just look terrible. I had a rental LaCrosse recently, and the vast expanse of grey plastic on the dash was less pleasing to the eye than the floormats. I am far more concerned with performance and reliability than I am with interior esthetics, but nevertheless the sheer awfulness of it struck me the minute I sat down.
More worrying to me, and this applies to GM, Ford, and Chrysler, is that they still seem to have the unfortunate habit of turning out lemons with some frequency. I have an online subscription to Consumer Reports. I know it’s not the gospel, but the section where other readers can review their own cars is very useful. I’ve been looking for a large sedan or a station wagon recently, and it’s alarming how many of the Big 3’s cars end up with one star along with a statement such as ‘never again’ or ‘lemon’. I am not prepared to gamble with the kind of money it takes to buy even the least expensive car (and before I get pounced on, I recognize that some manufacturers other than the big 3 have the same problem).
Worse still, they no longer have the cachet to motivate people to put up with difficulties. Land Rover, which makes the least reliable cars on the market by far, survives because they have luscious interiors and cache. Toronto is rotten with these $100k duds.
In short the reason I am so pessimistic about the big 3 is because addressing their situation takes time…time they don’t have.
Let’s say Cadillac builds a KILLER product. I’ll admit, the SRX reviews were enough to think about putting it on my shopping list back in 2005. Still not good enough. Why?
As someone who is in the Caddy target market (30’s, sufficient income to purchase anything short of an XLR) here’s but two reasons why I’m not even test driving the cars (but I guess to their credit, at least I THOUGHT about the brand):
Resale – My $45K Lexus is far less expensive to drive over 5-10 years than a $45K Cadillac.
Dealers – I know from personal experience with my local Cadillac dealer that I’m not sending my wife there for purchases/service.
It’s more than just product – at that price range I’m looking at a total package, a buying experience, if you will.
Now, sell me an SRX new at $25K, or a CTS-V at $29K, and I might think differently. But even with firesale prices, it’s too much money for indifferent engineering details, abysmal resale, questionable reliability, and typical GM/domestic dealer customer treatment.
They’ve got a tough road ahead…
Speedy:
Let me give you my take on your comments. Interior/layout matters when: a) you are spending this much money; and b) the competition offers significantly superior interiors/layout. Something about spending $35-40K on a car that feels cheap on the inside that would bother me every time I got into the car.
As for your list of cars, the 7 Series is the only Bimmer you would consider owning??? Kind words only for the Lexus SL600???Are you serious??? You don’t want a car, you want a barge that travels on land. That’s what pre-70’s Caddies were like as well.
All of the cars you profess to like are boulevard cruisers for the “over the hill gang”, not driving machines. Driving machines are cars like the BMW 335 or Audi RS4 or something less civilized like the WRX STI. I’m 51, but you can have my rocking chair. You need it far more than I do.