| Attention to detail and aesthetics
Cadillacs are easily my favorite vehicle, however I think a lot of good things have been lost over the years. The most obvious difference is in the look. This is purely subjective, and my opinion, but I think Cadillacs used to look much cooler. And not to point the finger at Cadillac, other companies have turned characteristics that distinguished them from each other into jelly beans. Anything before Y2K here, I could see a car a few hundred yards away and say with conviction "That's a Caddy, look at that sucker!" Now, in an effort to appeal to a more sporty audience, I'd be like "That's...a Caddy?...Lincoln maybe? Or maybe a Buick...could be a Grand Prix..."
The same thing has happened with these 3-letter names... I heard that this was a marketing tactic that worked for another car company, which Cadillac followed. Cadillacs are fine cars... No need to follow another example when you're what stood for leadership. The original names, in addition to looks, distinguish the automobile. It is a further degradation of the elimination of the Fleetwood--certainly an automobile that creates envy as it cruises down the road.
Lastly, engineering... Not to be all negative, there have been impressive advancements in the cars. The technology is to be commended. However, the effort could use a little work. Lincoln, for the longest time, tried to copy Cadillac, and because they were the unoriginal one, they always slightly failed. They always were a little bit shorter...always a little less engine....not quite as nice on the inside....and certainly, not as stylish. This has also gone out the window. "The Penalty of Leadership," an article which used to be included in the Cadillac manuals, and described it so well, is rightly no longer there (unless someone took it out of my friend's newer one).
Additionally, if the Cadillac, in this expensive age, is not going to be making shameless huge engines, then why not go two-fold on that? I have a 90, and that thing can tear up any hill loaded up...and the modern engines can put that thing under the table and get the same gas mileage. If the engine is capable of putting out that much more power, then why not devote it to mileage? Having power is nice, but I'd rather have a 4.6 that gets 30 mpg with 200 horse power than the 300 HP and torque. I know that's not as easy as 1-2-3, but it is certainly possible from the basic physics principle...trade force for distance, like being farther out on a wheel (or transmission gear).
I can understand the marketing possibilities... Going for a new image. However, when you're already the best, there's no sense in this. Also, it's sensible that because of economic situations, people don't have as much disposable income. Although by trying to break into a slightly cheaper car market, it alienates some of the people who originally had a reason they liked Cadillacs. Also, if someone is not looking for a luxury car, then $30,000 is not really a "bargain." There may not be as much money now in luxury as there once was, but trying to change what you stand for would only create a feedback loop. Not selling enough, cut financial corners and forfeit the "edge" the car has, people either still can't afford them or are unhappy with the changes, sell even less. It wouldn't always work that way of course, but without question, Cadillac has lost the reverence it once commanded and deserved.
This is not meant as a bashing... I think a good car company could be excellent. Compliments to all the hard work that has been done regardless. | 
. The other things like the cheapness of parts are not so subjective though...
