: How much should a "Top of the Line" Cadillac cost?



orconn
02-26-10, 11:09 PM
Many of us talk about the need for a true Cadillac luxury/prestige model, what should such a car cost in today's market. Also should it be a luxury sedan, a sports sedan or perhaps a limousine.

ben.gators
02-26-10, 11:30 PM
Many of us talk about the need for a true Cadillac luxury/prestige model, what should such a car cost in today's market. Also should it be a luxury sedan, a sports sedan or perhaps a limousine.

A top of the line means a luxury sedan for me. I think 55K, or at most 60K is good for it. I think Cadillacs are too expensive in comparison to other luxury brands., so if they want to have the market they need to think about costs of a Cadillac.

Stingroo
02-26-10, 11:36 PM
Top of the line would definitely have to be more than that.... A Fleetwood in the mid 90's was $40k.

Their TOP TIER car should be no more than 90k when FULLY optioned with the best engine choice, etc. etc. 60-65 to start with the base model.

The XTS is not that car, by the way.

ben.gators
02-27-10, 12:25 AM
Top of the line would definitely have to be more than that.... A Fleetwood in the mid 90's was $40k.


The XTS is not that car, by the way.

And that is partially why they lost the game to their European or Japanese competitors!
For rich Cadillac lovers, yes, they may pay even 200K for a Cadi, but to be more realistic with such prices Cadi can not do pretty well in attracting customers that don't have very tight biases toward Cadi.

itschrome
02-27-10, 01:07 AM
2.5 million. It should have 20 cylinders 10 turbos have 10k HP and go 300MPH. it should be 4dr's, seat 4 and be 30ft long.

Aron9000
02-27-10, 01:10 AM
I think $500,000 would've been a fair price for the Cadillac Sixteen, if they built it exactly like the show car, sixteen cylinders and all. I guarntee they would've sold about 2,000 of them over a 2 or 3 year production run. I mean Ford built the GT40 to shut up their critics, GM should've done something similar, just to show what they could really do when cost is no object.


Anyways, I think that if Cadillac were to offer an S-class competitor, start it off at 70k. Loaded it shouldn't be more than about 85k. That would be priced similar to a Lexus LS460, and undercut a Benz S-Class by about $20,000. If we had a V edition I think 95-100k would be a fair price IMO.

Bro-Ham
02-27-10, 09:54 AM
Why undercut a Mercedes-Benz? If Cadillac could build an exceptional car of true American character with top notch quality, engineering, and luxury I believe buyers would pay just as much or more to own a Cadillac as they would any competitor. Orconn asks what should the top model be and that is the tricky question. Should or can Cadillac compete with Rolls-Royce and Bentley in highest end of the luxury market? Should they continue doing whatever it is they are doing now, which, to me, is building vehicles with increasingly momentarily trendy styling to attempt to compete with Lexus and Mercedes? Is it time for new direction? There are lots of considerations. Cadillac needs to earn its way into the hearts and minds of luxury car buyers with a core model line of well executed models to build on and then movement upward will be natural. Why not have a innovative flexible top line Cadilac platform, like the new Rolls-Royce, on which any variation of models can be created including grand sized convertible, coupe', sedan, and extended wheelbase sedan? I think Cadillac has a long way to go to get the prestige back they once nearly exclusively controlled. Another XLR or Allante' aint' gonna cut it. I think following the leader with the DTS, STS, SXT type names is so boring and bringing back some interesting and well thought out car names could be a start of some All-American magic! But the names have to go on great cars.... :)

Stingroo
02-27-10, 10:11 AM
Why undercut a Mercedes-Benz? If Cadillac could build an exceptional car of true American character with top notch quality, engineering, and luxury I believe buyers would pay just as much or more to own a Cadillac as they would any competitor. Orconn asks what should the top model be and that is the tricky question. Should or can Cadillac compete with Rolls-Royce and Bentley in highest end of the luxury market? Should they continue doing whatever it is they are doing now, which, to me, is building vehicles with increasingly momentarily trendy styling to attempt to compete with Lexus and Mercedes? Is it time for new direction? There are lots of considerations. Cadillac needs to earn its way into the hearts and minds of luxury car buyers with a core model line of well executed models to build on and then movement upward will be natural. Why not have a innovative flexible top line Cadilac platform, like the new Rolls-Royce, on which any variation of models can be created including grand sized convertible, coupe', sedan, and extended wheelbase sedan? I think Cadillac has a long way to go to get the prestige back they once nearly exclusively controlled. Another XLR or Allante' aint' gonna cut it. I think following the leader with the DTS, STS, SXT type names is so boring and bringing back some interesting and well thought out car names could be a start of some All-American magic! But the names have to go on great cars.... :)

I agree. Names are better. You don't see any new Rolls-Royce PDHC's rolling around. No dammit. It's a Phantom Drophead Coupe. That's what it should be.

Sandy
02-27-10, 11:54 AM
Here are the actual Window Sticker prices of TODAY !

2010 STS (Seville V-8 Replacement)
Destination Fee
Firemist Paint
Performance/Handling Package
Platinum Edition
Front License Plate Arttachment
All Wheel Drive
$72,220.00

2010 DTS V-8 (deVille Replacement)
Destination Fee
Ultimate Package
Pearl Paint
$ 61,400.00

2010 CTS-"V" (Catera Replacement)
Destination Fee
Sapele Interior Wood
Suede Accents on Seats
Chrome Wheels
Medium Grey or Metallic Red Paint choice
$ 64,965.00

93DevilleUSMC
02-27-10, 12:04 PM
$85,000 and slot it to compete with much more expensive European luxury brands.

concorso
02-27-10, 12:38 PM
A top of the line means a luxury sedan for me. I think 55K, or at most 60K is good for it. I think Cadillacs are too expensive in comparison to other luxury brands., so if they want to have the market they need to think about costs of a Cadillac.What? Cadillacs are too expensive compared to other luxury brands? What? WHAT? Compare the cost of a CTS with an equivalently spec'd Audi A6, Mercedes E-class, or BMW 5-series. Compare the Excalade to the much smaller but much more expensive X5 or Q7. Compare the outgoing XLR to the SL.
Cadillac has the reputation of offering slightly cheaper luxury, they are the affordable luxury brand.

Cadillacs are cheaper then most luxury brands, especially the successful ones.
The cost of a luxury car is only 1 small part of how successful it will be. It needs to offer a complete package within the brands own identity. If Cadillac wants to be really successful, they need to offer MORE luxury at a higher price point with attractive exteriors and well thought out and inviting interiors. Affordable and luxury should never be said in the same sentence.

Bro-Ham
02-27-10, 01:05 PM
It takes plenty of hefty rebates and 0% financing to sell the Caddies of today.

RightTurn
02-27-10, 02:05 PM
Um, calling the CTS-V the "Catera replacement" can be dangerous. :suspense:

thebigjimsho
02-27-10, 02:09 PM
It should cost as much as it's worth...

Jesda
02-27-10, 02:47 PM
XLR-V would be worth $100k to me if it had an upgraded interior

C&C
02-27-10, 03:00 PM
Cadillac is the luxury car for the masses; while a top end vehicle could probably fetch 100 G's they can't forget about the rest of us and keep a quality vehicle around or below 50 thou (and that actually prices me out of the game). JMO

ben.gators
02-27-10, 03:39 PM
What? Cadillacs are too expensive compared to other luxury brands? What? WHAT? Compare the cost of a CTS with an equivalently spec'd Audi A6, Mercedes E-class, or BMW 5-series. Compare the Excalade to the much smaller but much more expensive X5 or Q7. Compare the outgoing XLR to the SL.
Cadillac has the reputation of offering slightly cheaper luxury, they are the affordable luxury brand.

.

Yes, currently Cadillac prices for CTS, STS and Escalade are adjusted to be more competitive, and this fact along with new modern designs enable them to sell more cars in US and also export to Euro and other countries as well. My point was mostly about the condition of Cadi prior to 2005, when e.g. a 2000 Forward wheel drive Seville was 50K, and now its price by considering normal annual millage is dropped to 4K! To have a part of market, Cadi always need to control the prices.



The cost of a luxury car is only 1 small part of how successful it will be. It needs to offer a complete package within the brands own identity. If Cadillac wants to be really successful, they need to offer MORE luxury at a higher price point with attractive exteriors and well thought out and inviting interiors. Affordable and luxury should never be said in the same sentence.


I did not use "Affordability", I said competitive prices. Being a luxury car does not imply that the company can put any tag on it and people should come and pay that money without any question. Even for buying a luxury car, still majority of buyers consider the price, except a very limited ultra rich people. If Cadi wants to restrict its customers to just this group, its sale number will be very very low.

Those old days that the big 3 companies have occupied US market, and just US market was enough for them, and the days that people pay Cadi what ever company asks for is gone. If Cadi wants to still stay in the business (As by the introduction of new models with reasonable prices it shows that it wants) it need to be very competitive even in terms of price in the soil of US, as well as in Euro, China, middle east,...

About the price range that I gave, I was a bit tough, it can be for base model, and full optione one I guess can go up to 70K, but not more.

ben.gators
02-27-10, 04:01 PM
It should cost as much as it's worth...

A very good point, my main problem is American big 3 companies (I may exclude Ford from the list) have sinked in problems produced by terrible form of management, a very inefficient structure, and lack of suitable human resource utilization. These problems have produced a big black hole, sucking the money of company, and to cover such costs, company is increasing the final price of cars. My problem is why me, as a loyal GM driver, need to pay these costs when I want to buy a Cadi!?
These three companies need to be supported now, and they should return back to business again, but with change of management and change of structure to construct good cars, for real and good prices.

P.S: There is no doubt in big 3 companies weaknesses in management and lack of good human resource utilization, else they never lost the US market to brands like Toyota (which has changed to be a thread to American lives now!), and finally they (except Ford) should not went bankrupt, which results in waste of American taxpayers money again.

Sandy
02-27-10, 07:19 PM
From my personal experience (I was in the car business from 1968 thru 1995) the majority of Cadillac "shoppers" are domestic buyers. The lion's share have a brand that they have had good luck with, know the dealer, know the salesperson, or purchase becaue the dealer's location is convenient to them.
IF (and that's a big word) >>> IF <<< the "Shop" they will 90% shop Liincoln & Chrysler.
If they are import buyers, they will shop M-B; BMW, Volvo, Lexus, Infiniti and Audi. There is very very little cross country shopping.
My father bought a new 1955 Caddy Series 62 (Pre-deVille model) and irt was a HUGE lemon !! It spend more time at the dealer's service department than it spent at home. Fed up, he traded it in on an 1957 Imperial, which was terrific.
It was the 1st of would would later be 6 consecutive Imperials.
He would never ever buy a non-American brand.

orconn
02-27-10, 08:16 PM
Sandy, back in your Dad's day the primary market for foreign luxury cars was Greater NYC and Los Angeles. Remember Mercedes was being sold through Studebaker-Packard dealerships and the other brands were sold at "Foreign Car" dealerships which sold several brands of British, German and Italian makers cars out of one dealership like John Inskip in NYC or Peter Satori in Pasadena,CA. Jaguars and Mercedes were the only "Luxury" foreign makes that most people were even a little aware of outside the wealthy in east and west coast (maybe Chicago) cities and their affluent suburbs. They were not be found in the Levttowns of America until much later in the century.

ben.gators
02-27-10, 09:34 PM
From my personal experience (I was in the car business from 1968 thru 1995) the majority of Cadillac "shoppers" are domestic buyers. The lion's share have a brand that they have had good luck with, know the dealer, know the salesperson, or purchase becaue the dealer's location is convenient to them.
IF (and that's a big word) >>> IF <<< the "Shop" they will 90% shop Liincoln & Chrysler.
If they are import buyers, they will shop M-B; BMW, Volvo, Lexus, Infiniti and Audi. There is very very little cross country shopping.
My father bought a new 1955 Caddy Series 62 (Pre-deVille model) and irt was a HUGE lemon !! It spend more time at the dealer's service department than it spent at home. Fed up, he traded it in on an 1957 Imperial, which was terrific.
It was the 1st of would would later be 6 consecutive Imperials.
He would never ever buy a non-American brand.

I always like your posts Sandy, they are a real piece of history, and there are a lot of new stuff that I did not know them before! Currently, the condition of US market is: Japanese car makers have almost occupied it, Korean are doing well, and Chinese car makers are at the gates of US (They have Volvo, MG, Rover, Hammer,...) and we will see them pretty soon. American 3 companies to survive need not only to compete with these brands in US, but also they need to move the front lines of fight to the competitors soil too. I really appreciate Buick for doing this, they are doing pretty well in China, and Cadi, Chevy, and others need to follow this trend too. In their soil, e.g. in Japan, euro, or China, just being a cadi is not enough to attract customers, they need to find other advantageous in terms of quality and price.

Stingroo
02-27-10, 09:44 PM
The Hummer sale fell through on the Chinese company, for the record.

77CDV
02-27-10, 10:02 PM
Why undercut a Mercedes-Benz? If Cadillac could build an exceptional car of true American character with top notch quality, engineering, and luxury I believe buyers would pay just as much or more to own a Cadillac as they would any competitor. Orconn asks what should the top model be and that is the tricky question. Should or can Cadillac compete with Rolls-Royce and Bentley in highest end of the luxury market? Should they continue doing whatever it is they are doing now, which, to me, is building vehicles with increasingly momentarily trendy styling to attempt to compete with Lexus and Mercedes? Is it time for new direction? There are lots of considerations. Cadillac needs to earn its way into the hearts and minds of luxury car buyers with a core model line of well executed models to build on and then movement upward will be natural. Why not have a innovative flexible top line Cadilac platform, like the new Rolls-Royce, on which any variation of models can be created including grand sized convertible, coupe', sedan, and extended wheelbase sedan? I think Cadillac has a long way to go to get the prestige back they once nearly exclusively controlled. Another XLR or Allante' aint' gonna cut it. I think following the leader with the DTS, STS, SXT type names is so boring and bringing back some interesting and well thought out car names could be a start of some All-American magic! But the names have to go on great cars.... :)

Cadillac "made it's bones" by providing more advanced cars than the competition at a lower price. Lexus, to it's credit, read it's history and duplicated the feat. Now that Cadillac has to reclaim it's lost position of "standard of the world", it needs to behave like an up and coming challenger. That means providing superior cars at a lower price point than the competition. So, yeah, about 10% to 20% below the competition, but with build and features at or above the segment benchmark.

Oh, and styling that makes the competition looks about as attractive and current as your great-grandmother's corset.

Sandy
02-28-10, 10:28 AM
Sorry, I do not agree!
Here's why..

1.) Domestics, especially in the "Luxury" range i.e. Cadillac, Cherysler & Lincoln, of 2010 (and for the past 7-8 years, also....have offered exactly what you stated for the future. Our cars are priced comparable to the foreign competition, and are as good - if not better.
It's their past, that haunts them, that being the past gone by, years & years ago, in the 70s & 80s.

2.) You are forgetting the EVERY single country that makes cars, has an unlimited amount to send here. As many as dealers order.....dealers get, be it 80 thou for Kia or a quarter Mil for M-B - they get 'em.

3.) Try THAT in Germany, for Mercurys, Try THAT in Italy for Corvettes, try THAT in Japan for Chevy Malibus!

Those countries have hefty taxes, limitations on vehicular importations and they make it HARD for their citizens to obtain a new American car.

4).So should we in America !! We need to cut imports, we need to offer tax credits to those that purchase new cars made by GM Ford & Chrysler.

5.)Sadly our fearless leaders have sold off of commerce to foreign countries, who are only our "friends" when they are making $$$$$$$$$$ on us !!!!!!!!
Our only true, real ally is Israel. The rest want to eat us, alive, and charge us for the pits!

No sympathy for Toyoda from me, either. His tears on TV did not match those of American Dealers who lost their franchises
due to dropping from 75 new vehicle sales a month, to 9 a month and then sold out the property to KFC or Wendies, or Burger King or McDonalds.

I~LUV~Caddys8792
02-28-10, 10:38 AM
Our only true, real ally is Israel. The rest want to eat us, alive, and charge us for the pits!

How so?

Bro-Ham
03-01-10, 03:53 PM
Cadillac "made it's bones" by providing more advanced cars than the competition at a lower price. Lexus, to it's credit, read it's history and duplicated the feat. Now that Cadillac has to reclaim it's lost position of "standard of the world", it needs to behave like an up and coming challenger. That means providing superior cars at a lower price point than the competition. So, yeah, about 10% to 20% below the competition, but with build and features at or above the segment benchmark.

Oh, and styling that makes the competition looks about as attractive and current as your great-grandmother's corset.

Craig, Cadillac started off as a benchmark brand with precision crafted ultra luxury models. With changing economics the Cadillac model line changed in 1941 to an emphasis on smaller self driven cars while the tip top of the line limited production grand sized Fleetwood choices all but evaporated. Cadillac went for mass production through the 1970's but the cars weren't necessarily cheap but innovations were becoming increasingly few. By the 1980's Cadillac had so missed the mark in almost everything they attempted yet loyal buyers continued to buy the name but the great-grandmother's corset, as you so humorously said, seemed to be the theme for what we have seen from Cadillac in the last 25 years with some redemption in the current model line.

The Cadillacs we see today need to be cheap because there isn't enough of anything "standard of the world" about them to set them apart from the competition. If Cadillac built a car that re-set the standard, so sexy in its styling, impeccable in its accoutrements, awesome in its performance, impressive in its engineering, safety, and quality, then we would see a competition clobbering car that can be sold for what it is worth rather than its value coming from an incrementally lower price. People who know the difference will always pay to own the best. I think that's why the once Cadillac dominated luxury car market has so many competitors, all very good cars. Not many of these luxury cars get me all that excited which makes me believe there is room for a game changer in the form of something so different yet familiar. Cadillac can have a true breakthrough, besides just a slogan, but they have to make a better effort than what we're seeing now.

Sandy
03-01-10, 05:37 PM
Israel United States relations are an important factor in the United States government's overall policy in the Middle East. The United States Congress places considerable importance on the maintenance of a close and supportive relationship with Israel. The main expression of support for Israel has been foreign aid, which Israel receives more of than any other state. The Congress monitors this aid closely, along with other issues in bilateral relations. Congressional concerns have affected different administrations' policies over the last 60 years.

Bilateral relations have evolved from an initial US policy of sympathy and support for the creation of a Jewish homeland in 1948 to an unusual partnership that links a small but militarily powerful Israel, dependent on the United States for its economic and military strength, with the US superpower trying to balance competing interests in the region. Israel is a strategic ally, and that US relations with Israel strengthen the US presence in the Middle East. Israel is one of the United States' two original major non-NATO allies in the Middle East.

orconn
03-01-10, 07:23 PM
Israel – United States relations are an important factor in the United States government's overall policy in the Middle East. The United States Congress places considerable importance on the maintenance of a close and supportive relationship with Israel. The main expression of support for Israel has been foreign aid, which Israel receives more of than any other state. The Congress monitors this aid closely, along with other issues in bilateral relations. Congressional concerns have affected different administrations' policies over the last 60 years.

Bilateral relations have evolved from an initial US policy of sympathy and support for the creation of a Jewish homeland in 1948 to an unusual partnership that links a small but militarily powerful Israel, dependent on the United States for its economic and military strength, with the US superpower trying to balance competing interests in the region. Israel is a strategic ally, and that US relations with Israel strengthen the US presence in the Middle East. Israel is one of the United States' two original major non-NATO allies in the Middle East.

^^^ All this information is essentially true. But your statement was that Israel is the U.S.'s only "true" ally. It would seem that Israel's reliance on the U.S. taxpayer for the maintenance of both its' economic and military strength speaks more to Israel's dependence on U.S. largess than to it's value as a "true" ally in the Middle East. "True" allies do not attack and murder their fellow ally's troops (see U.S.S. Liberty in Google). Nor do they instigate and carry out espionage against their allies as Israel has done continuosly since the founding of Israel in 1948. The truth is that the U.S. probably has no "true" allies.

77CDV
03-02-10, 12:29 AM
Craig, Cadillac started off as a benchmark brand with precision crafted ultra luxury models. With changing economics the Cadillac model line changed in 1941 to an emphasis on smaller self driven cars while the tip top of the line limited production grand sized Fleetwood choices all but evaporated. Cadillac went for mass production through the 1970's but the cars weren't necessarily cheap but innovations were becoming increasingly few. By the 1980's Cadillac had so missed the mark in almost everything they attempted yet loyal buyers continued to buy the name but the great-grandmother's corset, as you so humorously said, seemed to be the theme for what we have seen from Cadillac in the last 25 years with some redemption in the current model line.

The Cadillacs we see today need to be cheap because there isn't enough of anything "standard of the world" about them to set them apart from the competition. If Cadillac built a car that re-set the standard, so sexy in its styling, impeccable in its accoutrements, awesome in its performance, impressive in its engineering, safety, and quality, then we would see a competition clobbering car that can be sold for what it is worth rather than its value coming from an incrementally lower price. People who know the difference will always pay to own the best. I think that's why the once Cadillac dominated luxury car market has so many competitors, all very good cars. Not many of these luxury cars get me all that excited which makes me believe there is room for a game changer in the form of something so different yet familiar. Cadillac can have a true breakthrough, besides just a slogan, but they have to make a better effort than what we're seeing now.

Cadillac started off like a lot of other carmakers, making one-cylinder runabouts and demi-tonneaus. Eventually, they moved to 4 and 8 cylinder cars. What set Cadillac apart from the pack was meticulous build quality and high-precision engineering, which couldn't be matched even by the most expensive cars of the pre-War period (thank you, Henry Leland). But, they were not the most eye-catching things you ever saw, nor the most luxurious. Leland was adamant that he was building a "quality car", not a luxury car. Cars like Pierce-Arrow, Packard, Marmon, Franklin, Duesenberg, and Peerless were largely hand-crafted and many continued to use wood-framed bodies long after Cadillac had switched to steel. This made them vastly more expensive than any Cadillac, often as much as twice the price. But, they had the styling and opulance to back it up, much moreso that Cadillac.

Packard dominated the pre-War, pre-Depression market after it introduced it's Twin Six (V12). That led Cadillac to introduce the V16 and the V12, and that's what really put Cadillac on the map, along with the emphasis on style created when GM put Harley Earl in charge of it's new Art & Colour Department. The other American luxury makes, with their heavy reliance on hand-craftsmanship and attendant costs, couldn't survive the shrinking market of the Great Depression. Cadillac survived in great measure because it was backed up by GM, and Packard only because it moved downmarket with the 110, 120, and 180 series. When the dust of Depression and War had settled, only Cadillac and Packard (and to a lesser extent, Lincoln), had lived to duke it out in the late 1940s and into the 1950s. With the price wars of the 1950s and the collapse of the seller's market, Packard didn't stand a chance.

Cadillac won it's place after the War by default as much as anything. It surrendered that place due to complacency and a failure to keep up with the changing tastes of the market, resulting in cars that were sub-standard in their engineering and build quality, and were out of touch with their intended market segment. They're trying to get back on their game, but so far, I've been underwhelmed.

Bro-Ham
03-02-10, 07:35 AM
I wonder how many new Cadillacs are sold in Israel? :)

Bro-Ham
03-02-10, 07:37 AM
Cadillac started off like a lot of other carmakers, making one-cylinder runabouts and demi-tonneaus. Eventually, they moved to 4 and 8 cylinder cars. What set Cadillac apart from the pack was meticulous build quality and high-precision engineering, which couldn't be matched even by the most expensive cars of the pre-War period (thank you, Henry Leland). But, they were not the most eye-catching things you ever saw, nor the most luxurious. Leland was adamant that he was building a "quality car", not a luxury car. Cars like Pierce-Arrow, Packard, Marmon, Franklin, Duesenberg, and Peerless were largely hand-crafted and many continued to use wood-framed bodies long after Cadillac had switched to steel. This made them vastly more expensive than any Cadillac, often as much as twice the price. But, they had the styling and opulance to back it up, much moreso that Cadillac.

Packard dominated the pre-War, pre-Depression market after it introduced it's Twin Six (V12). That led Cadillac to introduce the V16 and the V12, and that's what really put Cadillac on the map, along with the emphasis on style created when GM put Harley Earl in charge of it's new Art & Colour Department. The other American luxury makes, with their heavy reliance on hand-craftsmanship and attendant costs, couldn't survive the shrinking market of the Great Depression. Cadillac survived in great measure because it was backed up by GM, and Packard only because it moved downmarket with the 110, 120, and 180 series. When the dust of Depression and War had settled, only Cadillac and Packard (and to a lesser extent, Lincoln), had lived to duke it out in the late 1940s and into the 1950s. With the price wars of the 1950s and the collapse of the seller's market, Packard didn't stand a chance.

Cadillac won it's place after the War by default as much as anything. It surrendered that place due to complacency and a failure to keep up with the changing tastes of the market, resulting in cars that were sub-standard in their engineering and build quality, and were out of touch with their intended market segment. They're trying to get back on their game, but so far, I've been underwhelmed.

Craig, As the world turns.... :)

Sandy
03-02-10, 10:25 AM
I think only a few, in the government. They Arabs are not exactly cutting the gas prices over there.

billc83
03-02-10, 10:32 AM
It's their past, that haunts them, that being the past gone by, years & years ago, in the 70s & 80s.

With all due respect to Sandy -

No one forced consumers to buy foreign cars. Detroit was pumping out crap for nearly two decades. They continuously overpromised and underdelivered, even recently. The perception gap is alive, and is mostly earned.

Granted, the products offered by the Big 3 are now light-years ahead of where they were. Most are competitive with their foreign counterparts. But the customers who left are NOT coming back.

It makes perfect sense. If I sold you an appliance that was utter crap, do you think you'd come back to me to buy another? What if you found out that I knew the appliance was crap, but sold it to you anyway? And I tried to weasel out of warranty work? Sure, you might like me personally or feel it's your patriotic duty to support a fellow American. But, most customers who are burned tend not to return.

It will take time to rebuild their reputation. Just like an abused girlfriend, the consumers are right to be a bit weary when the Big 3 unveil the latest "We've changed" ad campaign. As far as I'm concerned, the Big 3 should continue to offer up excellent product, work on improving their less desireable offerings, and work on continuously improving all models. It will take a rock solid reputation to counter the perception gap. No amount of advertisement can overcome a lackluster product.



So should we in America!! We need to cut imports, we need to offer tax credits to those that purchase new cars made by GM Ford & Chrysler.

America has tried before to halt the influx of foreign cars before, it didn't work. The Big 3 continued to lose market share.

I'll agree the playing field is not level in other countries. Japan in particular makes it excessively hard to own a foreign car. But tax credits for those who purchase only Big 3 is not the answer.

For one, it disregards smaller American companies such as Tesla, Fisker, and Aptera (apologies that all are EV based, I literally cannot think of any others, but I'm sure they are out there).

Bro-Ham
03-02-10, 02:03 PM
If GM, Chrysler, Ford make class leading cars then they won't need tax credits or rebates. If the newest batch of increasingly cool domestic cars turn out to be jewels then Consumer Reports will let us know, so will the car magazine editors, and, most importantly, so will your brother in law, neighbor, best friend, co-worker. You'll jump on the bandwagon of a winner and no sustainable tax credit will ever motivate any significant number of people to get into bed with a loser.

Sandy
03-02-10, 06:24 PM
Lets say (hope) that all of the cars from the Big 3 are steller, just to make my point.
There are 2 groups
Group #1 has been burnt in the past with a lemon
Group #2 has not - but has heard horror stories...

They are doubtfull that our cars have improved.

How then, do we get them to take a chance on us, again?
Again, like a girl that dumped ya, and now she wants ya back!

The government could assist our automobile industry by for like a year, offering some form of tax incentive to buy a domestic from the Big 3.
Call it bait, or whatever. With the Toyo mess, NOW is a great time to do it.

Stingroo
03-02-10, 06:41 PM
I vote no on that. Epic no. We have enough crap to pay for that we can't afford... and the last time we tried offering government incentives to buy cars, everybody bought Toyotas.

billc83
03-02-10, 06:47 PM
Cash for Clunkers probably would've been the ideal time to add in a stipulation "Rebates only on cars produced by American car companies." Toyota came out the winner of that. Especially now that the Japanese version of CFC stipulates only Japanese vehicles are eligible for their rebates.

Bro-Ham
03-02-10, 07:59 PM
Involving the government is just you and me spending our money for you and me to buy something. The government shouldn't have a right to spend our money to bribe people. Audi came back from sudden acceleration and they're a viable car company. VW went from the car of the people to the car driven by no people to the car that everyone fairly recently had to have to a car that not as many want and who knows where they go tomorrow?! :) Hyundai cars used to be the most cruddy shit-shakers of all time. Now they make a luxury car that steals even more Cadillac sales. Cadillac used to steal every luxury automaker's sales when they actually made Cadillacs. Why can't they again? Get the product right and the folks will buy. The government being involved would make me suspicious of anything and there isn't enough sustainable money in our economy to stimulate people to buy things they don't want. Remember, the government is you and me. The tax dollars politicians spend were earned by you and me. I'm sick of idiots blowing my money on ridiculousness. :)

V-Eight
03-02-10, 08:22 PM
I really think Cadillac should make a really high end the can compete with Ferrari, Lamborghini, etc.

I~LUV~Caddys8792
03-02-10, 08:48 PM
I remember reading somewhere that Ford sold a lot of cars due to C4C.

Cadillac competing with Ferrari & Lamborghini? Yeah right! :lol: I think that's what the Corvette is for.

V-Eight
03-02-10, 09:19 PM
I remember reading somewhere that Ford sold a lot of cars due to C4C.

Cadillac competing with Ferrari & Lamborghini? Yeah right! :lol: I think that's what the Corvette is for.

Yeah, but I think that a car like that would bring a whole new perspective to the brand. All they need to do it bring back the XLR but instead of putting in a shitstar, they should put in the LSA/LS9.

billc83
03-02-10, 10:06 PM
The only Cadillac worthy of competition with the Italian masters is the Cien.

77CDV
03-03-10, 02:24 AM
Cadillac needs to be competing with (read: trouncing) top-line Mercedes, Lexus, BMW, Audi, and Jaguar models. It's a luxury brand, not a full-on sports car. Part of GM's problem over the past thirty years has been a lack of focus and definition for what the individual marques are supposed to be. Hence, cars as disparate as a fire-breathing Buick Grand National and the Skylark from a single division. Both were Buicks, but which one really represents what Buick as a brand ought to be? More basically, what should a Buick be? Pontiac never could find the answer to that question, and look where that division is now.

ben.gators
03-03-10, 03:57 AM
Cadillac needs to be competing with (read: trouncing) top-line Mercedes, Lexus, BMW, Audi, and Jaguar models. It's a luxury brand, not a full-on sports car. Part of GM's problem over the past thirty years has been a lack of focus and definition for what the individual marques are supposed to be. Hence, cars as disparate as a fire-breathing Buick Grand National and the Skylark from a single division. Both were Buicks, but which one really represents what Buick as a brand ought to be? More basically, what should a Buick be? Pontiac never could find the answer to that question, and look where that division is now.

:yeah:
It seems that economic crisis has at least this advantageous that it forced GM to realize manufacturing too many models, but some how similar, is just waste of money! GM has started to allocate and assign different classes of cars to different brands, and stopped constructing overlapped brannds and models! Cadi is in charge of constructing luxury cars, which tries to compete with luxury cars made by Benz, BME, Audi, Infinitit, Acura. Corvette from GM is in charge of competing with Ferrari and Lamborghini. Designing a new high end cadi, which may require a new platform, for competing with Ferrari & Lamborghini can require an investment of even up to one billion dollar! OK, what will be the sale number of such an expensive car each year? 2000, 3000? And how much profit from each car? It is really hard even to get back the invested money, forget the profit! That is why auto companies prefer to manufacture cars that have reasonable prices to target a very larger number of potential costumers, instead of manufacturing vary expensive cars and limiting themselves to a very low number of annual sale!

Long story short, GM and Cadi may not have any considerable profit from constructing a very expensive car, I consider 70K as a hard top limit for cadi price!

I~LUV~Caddys8792
03-03-10, 06:56 PM
Cadillac needs to be competing with (read: trouncing) top-line Mercedes, Lexus, BMW, Audi, and Jaguar models. It's a luxury brand, not a full-on sports car. Part of GM's problem over the past thirty years has been a lack of focus and definition for what the individual marques are supposed to be. Hence, cars as disparate as a fire-breathing Buick Grand National and the Skylark from a single division. Both were Buicks, but which one really represents what Buick as a brand ought to be? More basically, what should a Buick be? Pontiac never could find the answer to that question, and look where that division is now.

Exactly. Ever since the '70s, the Buick/Oldsmobile divisions have blurred together, then Oldsmobile tried to go more European in the mid '90s, but it was too little too late. Olds was executed in '03, then it was Pontiac's turn. They had gotten too close to Chevrolet...or rather Chevrolet & them both had the sporty image, but Chevrolet had the stronger following, so they won.

If we want to go after the high end sports car, we should expand on the Corvette line. Maybe a mid engined V-10/V-12 Corvette? That couldn't hurt.

V-Eight
03-03-10, 07:21 PM
Cadillac needs to be competing with (read: trouncing) top-line Mercedes, Lexus, BMW, Audi, and Jaguar models. It's a luxury brand, not a full-on sports car.

Maybe, but that being said, some of those brands have cars that can compete. Audi has the R8, Mercedes has SLR.

V-Eight
03-03-10, 07:22 PM
If we want to go after the high end sports car, we should expand on the Corvette line. Maybe a mid engined V-10/V-12 Corvette? That couldn't hurt.

That would be interesting, then do you think we should make 'Corvette' a separate line like it is in Europe?

gary88
03-03-10, 07:35 PM
Part of what got GM in the huge mess they got themselves into was trying to be too many things at once. GM doesn't need a Ferrari/Lambo competitor anytime soon. They need to focus on reestablishing their image like they've slowly been doing and making cars people really want.

I~LUV~Caddys8792
03-03-10, 07:43 PM
Maybe, but that being said, some of those brands have cars that can compete. Audi has the R8, Mercedes has SLR.

Yes, but those cars aren't their core sales, but rather halo models meant to bring people into the showrooms & raise awareness. Much like the XLR was for Cadillac....and the Allante.