Who'd buy this Buick?
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 1,958
From: Kansas City, MO
That's why I said allegedly, but Buick has always been, in the GM heirarchy, a near luxury brand. As much as Cadillac has been "The Standard of the World." While this has not always been true in practice, it has always been true in theory.
No, it didn't work because Saturn customers who became more affluent moved on to other cars, or were the "practical" kind of buyer who chose to buy a "sensible" car even though they could afford more. But the majority of Saturn buyers were looking for a lower end car that offered reliability, value, and a good service experience. I will agree with you that I don't think that GM had the money to do a proper relaunch. And if they had, they probably could have made this work, but I don't think you are correct on all of your aspects of the Saturn customer theory.
I wish this were true, but I don't think it is. Even when Pontiac got the kind of cars people said they wanted from Pontiac, they didn't sell. And Buick's age could be played as a plus. It is the very foundation of General Motors. The brand the whole enchilada was built on. I don't ever see Lexus or Infiniti saying "Hey, were only 20 years old! Got some fresh luxury here, get your fresh luxury!" But Mercedes often plays up their long heritage and reputation.
styl·ish (stlsh)
adj.
Conforming to the current fashion; modish
So, by the very definition of the word, the new Buicks are already stylish.
Old, yes. Buick definitely has a stigma of being an old persons car. But that doesn't mean that can't change. Buick also has a reputation for being a very reliable car. So there are positives to play up as well.
In all honesty, I doubt anyone other than car enthusiast message board folk like us and people over 70 are really aware of the concept of Buick as a "Doctors Car." And "Doctor's Car" wasn't really any kind of stigma back in the day. It meant you had a luxurious and stylish car that wasn't so opulent (like a Cadillac) that your patients might think you were making a wee too much money (my great uncle WAS a doctor and he drove Buicks his whole life
)
STS - Yes. This car was a mistake in its current form. It simply doesn't offer anything over the CTS.
XLR - Crazy expensive halo car so I don't know if it could be considered either a success or failure.
Old SRX - I think this car was considered a success until the new model blew its sales out of the water. It received great reviews from the car rags.
DTS - This car hits exactly the spot it's supposed to hit. It's ancient and still has traditionally been one of Cadillac's best sellers. That is why it's being replaced by the XTS which will be similar in form and function. There is still a market for a floaty old man Caddy.
See XTS above. But unlike the Lincoln, let's keep it off the list of "Clunker Cars to Avoid."
Cadillac was known as the standard of the world in the 1950s and previous. I think you mean Sigma, but yes, Sigma was a last ditch effort to save the division. GM had to throw that money at Cadillac, or it would have been toast. And it (somewhat) worked. Cadillac still has a ways to go, but they're better positioned than they were before the launch of the first eneration CTS.
That was one of the core problems with the "old" GM. They were spread so thin they could really only throw their weight behind one thing at a time and everything else had to suffer. Put all the money into the CTS, nothing else gets money. Rush the GMT900s to market and delay everything else. Put the entire marketing budget into the Malibu at the expense of GMs own previously launched mid-size Aura and G6.
The LaCrosse is a Chinese Buick, but the Regal is really a rebadged Opel without the Chinese middle-man. It's derived from the Insignia just as the Chinese Regal is, but is actually more of a straight rebadge than the Chinese version of the car. If they have good cars, it doesn't make any sense to have to spend any more money on design. They need to spend the money on marketing (which they will be able to more so than ever before) to change the perception of the brand.
I agree that they need to keep working on it, but I don't think it will take as long as you think or cost all that much. Like you said, the cars are "free" so all they have to do is change the perception. The Enclave has an average buyer that is 12 years younger and considerably more affluent than other Buick buyers. That is one product and the effect was immediate. It didn't take years to find its audience. Hopefully the LaCrosse will continue that trend and the Regal will continue it further.
The problem is, GM wants a brand that competes somewhere in between Honda/Nissan and Acura/Infiniti. Saturn was a more logical fit to grow in to the role because it's original young customers were becoming more affluent, and would not consider any other GM car. In the end it did not work because GM did not have the money, or stomach for it.
adj.
Conforming to the current fashion; modish
So, by the very definition of the word, the new Buicks are already stylish.
In all honesty, I doubt anyone other than car enthusiast message board folk like us and people over 70 are really aware of the concept of Buick as a "Doctors Car." And "Doctor's Car" wasn't really any kind of stigma back in the day. It meant you had a luxurious and stylish car that wasn't so opulent (like a Cadillac) that your patients might think you were making a wee too much money (my great uncle WAS a doctor and he drove Buicks his whole life
)XLR - Crazy expensive halo car so I don't know if it could be considered either a success or failure.
Old SRX - I think this car was considered a success until the new model blew its sales out of the water. It received great reviews from the car rags.
DTS - This car hits exactly the spot it's supposed to hit. It's ancient and still has traditionally been one of Cadillac's best sellers. That is why it's being replaced by the XTS which will be similar in form and function. There is still a market for a floaty old man Caddy.
See XTS above. But unlike the Lincoln, let's keep it off the list of "Clunker Cars to Avoid."
That was one of the core problems with the "old" GM. They were spread so thin they could really only throw their weight behind one thing at a time and everything else had to suffer. Put all the money into the CTS, nothing else gets money. Rush the GMT900s to market and delay everything else. Put the entire marketing budget into the Malibu at the expense of GMs own previously launched mid-size Aura and G6.
I agree that they need to keep working on it, but I don't think it will take as long as you think or cost all that much. Like you said, the cars are "free" so all they have to do is change the perception. The Enclave has an average buyer that is 12 years younger and considerably more affluent than other Buick buyers. That is one product and the effect was immediate. It didn't take years to find its audience. Hopefully the LaCrosse will continue that trend and the Regal will continue it further.
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 13,713
From: The Golden State
Bob Lutz is no longer product czar.
In case you need a reminder who has the final word on product, go back a few months when Lutz said the Caprice was coming to Chevrolet show rooms, and Fritz shot that idea down and very publicly put Mr lutz (and those of us still thinking that Bob Lutz called the shots) in check by stating very publically "...he works for me".
It's very clear who's running GM's decision making.
The board has given Fritz unprecedented control over GM's decision making. At the same time he's being held accountable for getting results.
Fritz runs the show.
Bob Lutz is now in marketing.
A word from Fritz (not Bob Lutz) gets a GM car made nowadays
Jumping over to your points Branden, I'm as much a Buick critic as you are, but there are still facts that you missed that Eric brushed on that needs expanding.
First, Buick has one of the biggest brand loyalties of any vehicle sold in the US. Buick, for as poorly as it sold outside the rust belt, was still selling on par with Saturn and Buick was (on a per vehicle basis) very profitable.
Second point is that Cadillac's image was completely turned around. Picking out a few low volume and less than stellar selling items doesn't take away from that. Every successful car company has something that isn't a home run. But also consider that GM didn't lose any money on any of the Cadillacs you mentioned. Even the XLR. You also missed the glaring fact that the DTS actually sold on par (and occasionally, above) the CTS in volume quite often over this decade. The DTS may not be the cup of tea you or I would drink, but putting on a business hat and looking at what the public wants, the DTS is in there with the CTS... like it or not.
Finally, I have been right up there with others in all but bashing GM over letting Pontiac go and keeping Buick. In the same vein, Saturn was a basket case that deserved to be let go. There wasn't a single vehicle in the Saturn showroom that wasn't available elsewhere at a lower price. Bob Lutz tried to move Saturn upscale by capitalizing on Saturn's unique dealer and service network, and Saturn's youngish demographics. It failed miserably because:
1. It alienated those who looked at Saturn as a Toyota-like, low priced, workaday transportation means.
2. Those who moved upmarket from Saturn were going to import brands like Lexus, Infiniti, and even base Benzs and BMWs.
3. The move upscale put Saturn at a price disadvantage next to Chevrolet and Ford which offered the same vehicles with equal or better quality with more gizmos and bells and whistles at a lower price.
Cadillac, on the other hand, became more of a value brand. 10 years ago, it wasn't even on the same level as Lexus and Infiniti. Now, Cadillac is chasing BMW and Mercedes. The XLR was never supposed to be a volume car, but when it came into the showroom behind the CTS, STS, & Escalade it was enough to completely transform Cadillac's image.
Again, I was (and to a point, still am) very critical of GM keeping Buick over Pontiac. Pontiac sold higher volume even discounting fleet and rental sales. Pontiac was everything Saturn was without the price. It would have fit in nicely between Chevrolet and Cadillac, while emphasizing a performance image, it would have attracted a unique buyer from either.
However, I am open to the possibility that GM might actually pull off transforming Buick. the reason is quite simple. A) So far the 2 new Buicks (Lacrosse and Regal) are clearly cars leading in a different direction, and B) Chenging the direction of Cadillac was far more difficult because it was a far bigger change (from a car for rust belt retirees to a BMW competitor?!... yea right).
One thing with criticizing. You also have to give credit wher credit is due.
If GM sustains the effort with Buick, and does it very quickly (as they did with Cadillac), then they can bring a all-but-forgotten brand back into the limelight in a big way.
Keep in mind....
.... you can't even get a manual transmission on a Chevrolet Malibu.... but you can get one on a frigging Buick Regal sedan!!
If that doesn't say something, nothing will.
In case you need a reminder who has the final word on product, go back a few months when Lutz said the Caprice was coming to Chevrolet show rooms, and Fritz shot that idea down and very publicly put Mr lutz (and those of us still thinking that Bob Lutz called the shots) in check by stating very publically "...he works for me".
It's very clear who's running GM's decision making.
The board has given Fritz unprecedented control over GM's decision making. At the same time he's being held accountable for getting results.
Fritz runs the show.
Bob Lutz is now in marketing.
A word from Fritz (not Bob Lutz) gets a GM car made nowadays
Jumping over to your points Branden, I'm as much a Buick critic as you are, but there are still facts that you missed that Eric brushed on that needs expanding.
First, Buick has one of the biggest brand loyalties of any vehicle sold in the US. Buick, for as poorly as it sold outside the rust belt, was still selling on par with Saturn and Buick was (on a per vehicle basis) very profitable.
Second point is that Cadillac's image was completely turned around. Picking out a few low volume and less than stellar selling items doesn't take away from that. Every successful car company has something that isn't a home run. But also consider that GM didn't lose any money on any of the Cadillacs you mentioned. Even the XLR. You also missed the glaring fact that the DTS actually sold on par (and occasionally, above) the CTS in volume quite often over this decade. The DTS may not be the cup of tea you or I would drink, but putting on a business hat and looking at what the public wants, the DTS is in there with the CTS... like it or not.
Finally, I have been right up there with others in all but bashing GM over letting Pontiac go and keeping Buick. In the same vein, Saturn was a basket case that deserved to be let go. There wasn't a single vehicle in the Saturn showroom that wasn't available elsewhere at a lower price. Bob Lutz tried to move Saturn upscale by capitalizing on Saturn's unique dealer and service network, and Saturn's youngish demographics. It failed miserably because:
1. It alienated those who looked at Saturn as a Toyota-like, low priced, workaday transportation means.
2. Those who moved upmarket from Saturn were going to import brands like Lexus, Infiniti, and even base Benzs and BMWs.
3. The move upscale put Saturn at a price disadvantage next to Chevrolet and Ford which offered the same vehicles with equal or better quality with more gizmos and bells and whistles at a lower price.
Cadillac, on the other hand, became more of a value brand. 10 years ago, it wasn't even on the same level as Lexus and Infiniti. Now, Cadillac is chasing BMW and Mercedes. The XLR was never supposed to be a volume car, but when it came into the showroom behind the CTS, STS, & Escalade it was enough to completely transform Cadillac's image.
Again, I was (and to a point, still am) very critical of GM keeping Buick over Pontiac. Pontiac sold higher volume even discounting fleet and rental sales. Pontiac was everything Saturn was without the price. It would have fit in nicely between Chevrolet and Cadillac, while emphasizing a performance image, it would have attracted a unique buyer from either.
However, I am open to the possibility that GM might actually pull off transforming Buick. the reason is quite simple. A) So far the 2 new Buicks (Lacrosse and Regal) are clearly cars leading in a different direction, and B) Chenging the direction of Cadillac was far more difficult because it was a far bigger change (from a car for rust belt retirees to a BMW competitor?!... yea right).
One thing with criticizing. You also have to give credit wher credit is due.
If GM sustains the effort with Buick, and does it very quickly (as they did with Cadillac), then they can bring a all-but-forgotten brand back into the limelight in a big way.
Keep in mind....
.... you can't even get a manual transmission on a Chevrolet Malibu.... but you can get one on a frigging Buick Regal sedan!!
If that doesn't say something, nothing will.
Last edited by guionM; Nov 25, 2009 at 12:43 PM.
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 3,698
From: USA
Jumping over to your points Branden, I'm as much a Buick critic as you are, but there are still facts that you missed that Eric brushed on that needs expanding.
First, Buick has one of the biggest brand loyalties of any vehicle sold in the US. Buick, for as poorly as it sold outside the rust belt, was still selling on par with Saturn and Buick was (on a per vehicle basis) very profitable.
First, Buick has one of the biggest brand loyalties of any vehicle sold in the US. Buick, for as poorly as it sold outside the rust belt, was still selling on par with Saturn and Buick was (on a per vehicle basis) very profitable.
Second point is that Cadillac's image was completely turned around. Picking out a few low volume and less than stellar selling items doesn't take away from that. Every successful car company has something that isn't a home run. But also consider that GM didn't lose any money on any of the Cadillacs you mentioned. Even the XLR. You also missed the glaring fact that the DTS actually sold on par (and occasionally, above) the CTS in volume quite often over this decade. The DTS may not be the cup of tea you or I would drink, but putting on a business hat and looking at what the public wants, the DTS is in there with the CTS... like it or not.
Finally, I have been right up there with others in all but bashing GM over letting Pontiac go and keeping Buick. In the same vein, Saturn was a basket case that deserved to be let go. There wasn't a single vehicle in the Saturn showroom that wasn't available elsewhere at a lower price.
Bob Lutz tried to move Saturn upscale by capitalizing on Saturn's unique dealer and service network, and Saturn's youngish demographics. It failed miserably because:
1. It alienated those who looked at Saturn as a Toyota-like, low priced, workaday transportation means.
2. Those who moved upmarket from Saturn were going to import brands like Lexus, Infiniti, and even base Benzs and BMWs.
3. The move upscale put Saturn at a price disadvantage next to Chevrolet and Ford which offered the same vehicles with equal or better quality with more gizmos and bells and whistles at a lower price.
1. It alienated those who looked at Saturn as a Toyota-like, low priced, workaday transportation means.
2. Those who moved upmarket from Saturn were going to import brands like Lexus, Infiniti, and even base Benzs and BMWs.
3. The move upscale put Saturn at a price disadvantage next to Chevrolet and Ford which offered the same vehicles with equal or better quality with more gizmos and bells and whistles at a lower price.
Cadillac, on the other hand, became more of a value brand. 10 years ago, it wasn't even on the same level as Lexus and Infiniti. Now, Cadillac is chasing BMW and Mercedes. The XLR was never supposed to be a volume car, but when it came into the showroom behind the CTS, STS, & Escalade it was enough to completely transform Cadillac's image.
[/quote]Again, I was (and to a point, still am) very critical of GM keeping Buick over Pontiac. Pontiac sold higher volume even discounting fleet and rental sales. Pontiac was everything Saturn was without the price. It would have fit in nicely between Chevrolet and Cadillac, while emphasizing a performance image, it would have attracted a unique buyer from either.
However, I am open to the possibility that GM might actually pull off transforming Buick. the reason is quite simple. A) So far the 2 new Buicks (Lacrosse and Regal) are clearly cars leading in a different direction, and B) Chenging the direction of Cadillac was far more difficult because it was a far bigger change (from a car for rust belt retirees to a BMW competitor?!... yea right).
One thing with criticizing. You also have to give credit wher credit is due.
If GM sustains the effort with Buick, and does it very quickly (as they did with Cadillac), then they can bring a all-but-forgotten brand back into the limelight in a big way.
Keep in mind....
.... you can't even get a manual transmission on a Chevrolet Malibu.... but you can get one on a frigging Buick Regal sedan!!
If that doesn't say something, nothing will.
[/QUOTE]The problem is..we heard this all with Saturn..and when I said it was crap..people though I was crazy 3 years ago. I feel like Charlie Brown trying to kick the football..because outside of Cadillac, GM has never followed through on it's plans.
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 2,154
From: All around
Buick certainly has a lot of open potential, and I'll agree to that. Look at what Cadillac offers. DTS vs CTS. Young versus old. CTS vs CTS-V. Young versus lunatic. There are now flavors of Cadillac for doctors looking for cushy rides, presidential limos, mid-30s sporty sedans, and 550hp supercharged cruise missles. And this has all been accomplished in under a decade.
The Regal will never be a big, cushy, comfortable American car for folks that don't want to feel a single bump. But it can still be a buick, still be sporty, and still try and take the brand in a new direction. If it'll never be a big buick, why not turn it up to 11 and make it part of the new Buick+Pontiac=Buick identity? Why not try and win Pontiac buyers back?
How many people thought Cadillac was insane by bringing the CTS and the "art and science" theme to light?
How many people think the Regal is the same way?
There's still hope. And with the Insignia OPC, hope with very pretty wheels.
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,496
From: Roseville, MI, USA
Bob Lutz is no longer product czar.
In case you need a reminder who has the final word on product, go back a few months when Lutz said the Caprice was coming to Chevrolet show rooms, and Fritz shot that idea down and very publicly put Mr lutz (and those of us still thinking that Bob Lutz called the shots) in check by stating very publically "...he works for me".
It's very clear who's running GM's decision making.
The board has given Fritz unprecedented control over GM's decision making. At the same time he's being held accountable for getting results.
Fritz runs the show.
Bob Lutz is now in marketing.
A word from Fritz (not Bob Lutz) gets a GM car made nowadays
In case you need a reminder who has the final word on product, go back a few months when Lutz said the Caprice was coming to Chevrolet show rooms, and Fritz shot that idea down and very publicly put Mr lutz (and those of us still thinking that Bob Lutz called the shots) in check by stating very publically "...he works for me".
It's very clear who's running GM's decision making.
The board has given Fritz unprecedented control over GM's decision making. At the same time he's being held accountable for getting results.
Fritz runs the show.
Bob Lutz is now in marketing.
A word from Fritz (not Bob Lutz) gets a GM car made nowadays
We won't see the retail version until the second part of 2012.
And while Bob has said several times to me that he has no interest in being GM CEO his very broad title gives him the authority of a CEO. You mean to tell me that you really think Fritz is behind all of these significant changes? Fritz is nothing but "bought time" for the Government.
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 1,958
From: Kansas City, MO
It all comes down to one thing, the thing American's care about most MONEY!!!
If Toyota came in and decided that they wanted to move Scion above Toyota, but under Lexus, that wouldn't work. That's what GM tried to do with Saturn. With Buick, they are replacing $30,000 cars with much nicer $30,000 cars. I don't see where the problem is.
Go back and read this thread. See how many people are talking about actually buying this car? When's the last time that happened with a Buick around here? Same thing on GM Inside News and other sites.
Just because you and your wife don't want an Enclave doesn't mean that other people don't. There's lots of cars I don't want that the manufacturers sell the hell out of. Isn't that weird? I mean, if I don't like them who the heck would?
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 3,698
From: USA
We will have to see in 3 years or so..won't we.
Bunkie Knudsen, in his transformation of Pontiac from an "old man's car" with "old man suspenders" to a sporty and youthful brand (something in did over the course of three years in 1957-1959) noted that you can "sell a young man's car to an old man, but you can't sell an old man's car to a young man."
The problem is...there is a huge difference in what is going on here. There were a ton of people who said the Saturn thing wouldn't work, so I don't think you were exactly the Paul Revere of the situation.
It all comes down to one thing, the thing American's care about most MONEY!!!
If Toyota came in and decided that they wanted to move Scion above Toyota, but under Lexus, that wouldn't work. That's what GM tried to do with Saturn. With Buick, they are replacing $30,000 cars with much nicer $30,000 cars. I don't see where the problem is.
Go back and read this thread. See how many people are talking about actually buying this car? When's the last time that happened with a Buick around here? Same thing on GM Inside News and other sites.
Just because you and your wife don't want an Enclave doesn't mean that other people don't. There's lots of cars I don't want that the manufacturers sell the hell out of. Isn't that weird? I mean, if I don't like them who the heck would?
The problem is...there is a huge difference in what is going on here. There were a ton of people who said the Saturn thing wouldn't work, so I don't think you were exactly the Paul Revere of the situation.
It all comes down to one thing, the thing American's care about most MONEY!!!
If Toyota came in and decided that they wanted to move Scion above Toyota, but under Lexus, that wouldn't work. That's what GM tried to do with Saturn. With Buick, they are replacing $30,000 cars with much nicer $30,000 cars. I don't see where the problem is.
Go back and read this thread. See how many people are talking about actually buying this car? When's the last time that happened with a Buick around here? Same thing on GM Inside News and other sites.
Just because you and your wife don't want an Enclave doesn't mean that other people don't. There's lots of cars I don't want that the manufacturers sell the hell out of. Isn't that weird? I mean, if I don't like them who the heck would?
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 4,306
From: Jersey Shore
GM followed through with plans for Caddy?!?!?! HBAHWAHHAHAHA!!
Yeah, where?
they went from 1 RWD platform that made the CTS and CTS-V, STS and STS-V, along with SRX. There were up to 3 V6 engines, 3 V8 engines, three types of transmissiosn, and two drivetrain layouts
Now we have 1 RWD car that makes the CTS and CTS-V, with 2 engines, 2 drivetrain lay outs, and 3 trans.
they have moved towards a FWD SRX and a FWD flagship.
They canned the V8 while everyone else is moving foward, INCLUDING HYUNDAI!
The only hope Caddy has is a half-cooked sedan that doesnt compete in any segment to its full extent.
No one has ever given me a straight answer as to why couldnt Sigma 2 be used to make an STS and SRX replacement, when BMW can make 6 cars off teh same platform?
Bull**** excuses from the standard of the world. Caddy has forgot what they used to be.
Yeah, where?
they went from 1 RWD platform that made the CTS and CTS-V, STS and STS-V, along with SRX. There were up to 3 V6 engines, 3 V8 engines, three types of transmissiosn, and two drivetrain layouts
Now we have 1 RWD car that makes the CTS and CTS-V, with 2 engines, 2 drivetrain lay outs, and 3 trans.
they have moved towards a FWD SRX and a FWD flagship.
They canned the V8 while everyone else is moving foward, INCLUDING HYUNDAI!
The only hope Caddy has is a half-cooked sedan that doesnt compete in any segment to its full extent.
No one has ever given me a straight answer as to why couldnt Sigma 2 be used to make an STS and SRX replacement, when BMW can make 6 cars off teh same platform?
Bull**** excuses from the standard of the world. Caddy has forgot what they used to be.
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 13,713
From: The Golden State
GM followed through with plans for Caddy?!?!?! HBAHWAHHAHAHA!!
Yeah, where?
they went from 1 RWD platform that made the CTS and CTS-V, STS and STS-V, along with SRX. There were up to 3 V6 engines, 3 V8 engines, three types of transmissiosn, and two drivetrain layouts
Now we have 1 RWD car that makes the CTS and CTS-V, with 2 engines, 2 drivetrain lay outs, and 3 trans.
they have moved towards a FWD SRX and a FWD flagship.
They canned the V8 while everyone else is moving foward, INCLUDING HYUNDAI!
The only hope Caddy has is a half-cooked sedan that doesnt compete in any segment to its full extent.
No one has ever given me a straight answer as to why couldnt Sigma 2 be used to make an STS and SRX replacement, when BMW can make 6 cars off teh same platform?
Bull**** excuses from the standard of the world. Caddy has forgot what they used to be.
Yeah, where?
they went from 1 RWD platform that made the CTS and CTS-V, STS and STS-V, along with SRX. There were up to 3 V6 engines, 3 V8 engines, three types of transmissiosn, and two drivetrain layouts
Now we have 1 RWD car that makes the CTS and CTS-V, with 2 engines, 2 drivetrain lay outs, and 3 trans.
they have moved towards a FWD SRX and a FWD flagship.
They canned the V8 while everyone else is moving foward, INCLUDING HYUNDAI!
The only hope Caddy has is a half-cooked sedan that doesnt compete in any segment to its full extent.
No one has ever given me a straight answer as to why couldnt Sigma 2 be used to make an STS and SRX replacement, when BMW can make 6 cars off teh same platform?
Bull**** excuses from the standard of the world. Caddy has forgot what they used to be.
Few questions.
1. What half cooked sedan are you talking about?
2. Did you miss the fact that the FWD DTS and the RWD CTS took turns outselling each other over the past 7 years?
3. The public wants a FWD based crossover, the RWD SRX didn't do well, now the SRX is FWD based....so where's the problem?
Like I mentioned, if this site collectively ran a car company they may as well file for bankruptcy now because on an enthusiast site we tend to be pretty delusional where it comes to what real people buy.
We don't (and often simply won't) understand that people's purchase choices don't match with our own desire for RWD cars, cars that pull people from Mercedes and BMWs, or the belief of many that more power and higher skidpad numbers mean more sales. Facts are that the public simply wants a vehicle they enjoy. That they like driving, and like being seen in.
Cadillac was a big success pretty much this entire decade. GM (in one of the extremely few things it did right in that era) made this happen by a commitment to turning around Cadillac's image from a had been pretty much mud (far behind even Lincoln) to one that has cars that can compete with a couple of the world's brand names at a lot lower retail price.
Sure, some of you can split hairs, hold up the XLR as an example of what you believe to be a bad, misrun Cadillac. Others might latch on to the fact that GM decided to preserve it's resources by killing a powerplant whose days in regular luxury cars were numbered in favor of modernizing GM's LS V8 engines and using them. But you'll also likely gloss over the fact that the V6 Cadillac is using to replace that Northstar V8 makes more power, is lighter, and gets alot better fuel economy.
The real opinion that matters is the public. So far this decade, Cadillac has done exceptionally well. Perhaps Cadillac doesn't measure up to your "Standard of the World". Perhaps to you, it really is all just "Bull****" excuses. But unless you are talking about what Cadillac was back in the 1930s when Cadillac was on par with Rolls Royce, saying Cadillac "forgot" what they used to be is downright silly.
The best Cadillacs ever made in my lifetime... both in quality and in standing in the world... are in showrooms right now.
And I'd bet I've been around a little longer than you.
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 3,698
From: USA
The DTS is in a completely different world than the CTS. It's a Buick for people who want to say they own a Cadillac. Plus I question how many DTS sales were retail. If it outsold the CTS at some point the Herse market must have had an uptick.
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 3,132
From: Santa Clara, CA
It doesn't appeal to me. I'd rather have RWD and a powerful V6 or V8. I guess it does pretty well on the power part, but I'd rather have the same power from a larger V6 than a small 2.8 turbo. I guess a just described the G37 or my G8 GT.
If I really wanted an AWD sedan, I'd look more at the Legacy 3.6R.
If I really wanted an AWD sedan, I'd look more at the Legacy 3.6R.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
carguyshu
Parts For Sale
20
Jan 22, 2017 11:19 AM
warmeck
General 1967-2002 F-Body Tech
16
Jul 17, 2015 01:36 PM
NewsBot
2010 - 2015 Camaro News, Sightings, Pictures, and Multimedia
1
Jan 8, 2015 11:29 PM
Reno Leigh
Automotive News / Industry / Future Vehicle Discussion
34
Aug 27, 2002 06:51 PM
