[Katshot]

Funny you should mention this. I'm currently working up an advertizing plan for Cadillac. I've tried several times to get through to them and been blown off. Recently, I guess I finally hit the right chord and they have started a file for me and have asked me to contact someone up the tree about my ideas.

Basically, as I've said many times here, I believe Cadillac has to get back to basics and stop worrying about doing the "we have that too" game, or the "yeah but we have this neat new gadget in our cars" game. The top of the line luxury cars got where they are through rock solid engineering, and product development, not gimmicks.
People always respected Cadillac back when it stood out from the crowd, but started loosing respect (and interest) when they started looking and feeling like too many other cars. I feel this mainly started in 1985 with the advent of the FWD "C" car. The GM cookie cutter cars;
1. Cadillac Deville
2. Buick Park Ave.
3. Olds 98

Hell, Lincoln even made a whole advertizing blitz capitolizing on this issue, correctly pointing out that you couldn't tell those three cars apart.

As soon as Cadillac goes back to what made them great, they will retain their rightful place at the top of the automotive world.

1. Distinctive styling
2. Top quality materials
3. Seperate product development from the rest of GM
4. Better customer service for ALL Cadillac customers, not just NEW car customers.
5. Closer watch on the executive staffing including product team leaders.
6. Total emphasis on QUALITY.

 

[Katshot]

I could not possibly agree more to this statement

To be honest, I didn't even address this point because it can't happen. Cadillac (and other OEMs) have much less control over the dealers than people think.
Hell, look what happened with Ford and the "Blue Oval" plan.

 

[Katshot]

There's also the point that the dealer really does need to be creative when it comes to generating income. They don't make all that much on the actual sale of the car. The majority of their income is from financing, accesories, warranties, service, and body repairs.

 

[Katshot]

nah, kids don't have that kind of money to buy a caddy. Unless of course it's 200 miles away, only goes into reverse, has a very bad paint job, comes with no keys, and is at some impound lot :rolling:

He's right. The only Caddys kids are buying are old ones. Definately not new ones. It's really got to get back to basics or they will be doomed to be repeating the same old mistakes. Short-term successes are not what Cadillac needs to be concerned with.

 

[Katshot]

I think a GREAT idea would be what AAT did as a "commemorative" Corvette. Has anybody here seen it? Check out http://www.aatcars.com and see.
I think a Cadillac, or any old car brought to life on an up-to-date chassis just as they did for the '53 Corvette, would be awesome.

 

[Katshot]

Here is my take after I did a semester-long project on the CTS. Cadillac is a LUXURY car company. According the the US government a luxury car is a car which retails for more then $40,000. Caddilac is currently the second most pure luxury brand, they trail lincoln which is about 80% pure.

The biggest problem they are facing is what all other luxury brands are facing. They are tryng to get people into "near-luxury" cars such as the CTS or Lincoln LS. These cars are canibalizing the brands which they come from. If Cadillac wants to survive they should be more of a luxury brand, sure, a $30,000 Cadillac is great! But with the $30,000 you get a car which didnt have as much time or QUALITY materials put into it. In doing my research I test drove and thouroughly (sp?) went over a base CTS. After 10 min in it, I relaized it felt ALOT like every other CHEVY on the road. Yes, it had Cadillac logos all over it, but in the end It felt like i was sitting in a Chevy. There leather was hard, the dash was plastic, and there was no wood trim.

Compared to my 8 year old Eldorado: the dash is plush, the wood is pronounced and REAL, and the leather is soft.

Yes, the CTS is increasing sales and bringing in younger buyers, but it is sacrificing the cadillac name. Younger people dont have the money for a $42,000 Cadillac, but they do have the money for a $30,000 CTS. I dont think Cadillac should have brought out a near-luxury car. This is no better then the "keeping up witht he Jones's theory". They should have put more time into making the true luxury cars into better cars. Give use more luxury RWD cars with real power and features people want.

On the other hand, a lower priced Cadillac may be what they need. However, selling a near luxury car makes them Buick, they are treadding on thin ice and have to be very careful about which direction they take their near luxury cars. If people have this one, I can garuntee they will want more choices at this price, that my friends, will destroy Cadillac.

Not bad, you have some good ideas there.

 

[Katshot]

so they can make it like lincoln which has absolutly no clear direction or marketing plan?

I don't know, Lincoln seems to be doing just fine, and with a more thought-out product line too.
I mean, look at them vs. Cadillac. Lincoln had 3 vehicles until the Aviator (which I happen to be buying today) came out and they are managing to keep Cadillac (who has a 7 vehicle product line) on their toes in the sales department. As it stands right now, Lincoln has a fairly common sense lineup; 2 cars, one big, one small, and 2 SUVs, one big, and one small.
Cadillac on the other hand has 3 cars (soon to be 4 if the XLR ever comes out), one big, one pretty big, and one small, and 3 SUVs (soon to be 4) ,one friggin' huge, one big, and the EXT that I dare somebody to classify.
I would say that it's Cadillac that has a rather foggy idea of what their marketing plan is. It sounds to me like they figure that they will just keep sucking funds out of GM to build different products until they hit on a winner. And then build as many versions of that product as they can. It's already coming true, the CTS is a hit and in the next couple years, all Cadillacs will look like CTSs. Remember, you heard it here first.

 

[Katshot]

Yeah, I drove the Navigator and although it has anything you'd ever want toy wise, the ride is not that good still (meaning it's better than it used to be at least), and the engine is seriously labored. By contrast, the Aviator (very surprisingly) has a noticably smoother ride, better handling, 5-speed auto, and WAY better power ( strangly higher power output than the Nav). All that, and virtually identical styling and options for 10K less. I said SOLD!! The dealer called a couple hours ago to tell me that the truck is in (they had to get one from another dealer to get the color and options we wanted), so hopefully tomorrow, I'll be driving it to work. GOOD-BYE GMC DENALI!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
POS spent more time at the dealer than in my driveway, and GMC has no business selling premium vehicles anyway. They have no clue how to handle that type of customer.

 

[Katshot]

what color & options? They have great reviews. I'd buy a aviator over an explorer anyday, but then again, aviators cost more.

Black w/parchment interior. We wanted every option except the rear entertainment package (no little kids anymore), but I may be stuck getting it too. The salesman called and said the truck had ALL the options and started to say something about the DVD and stopped. He knows we didn't really want it, but this one MAY have it anyway. Who knows? There's NOT a lot of them out there so pickin's are sparce.

 

[Katshot]

Ummm, no kidding. There is pretty ample evidence in the form of Escalades, SRX, XLR, STS spy shots that they are headed that way.



I liked the Aviator, but I couldnt get over the interior. It looked nice, but the silver plastic? in the center console turned me off a bit.

I just put a deposit down on an '04 X5

Nice truck but in my case, it'll be driven by the wife most of the time so SHE's gotta like it. And she doesn't like the Euro look. Besides, I'd want to get it loaded, and on an X5 that gets rather pricey. I wanted to get a Lexus to be honest, but the RX doesn't have a 3rd row seat, the LX is more money than I wanted to spend, and the GX being based on the 4-Runner, rides rough and to be honest we both think it's ugly. I wouldn't mind waiting for the SRX but knowing GM, I'll just be getting another POS that spends too much time at the dealer. I think I'll let that one go for a year or so before I buy (probably should've waited in the case of the Denali too). There's really not many SUVs out there in the price range I was looking at. Especially when you take GM and the Euro stuff out of the equation. Ford, DC, and the Japanese are all I had to look at. Hell, I liked our last Ford, the Expedition was reliable and solid. If the Navigator had just riden better in '01, I'd have it now instead of the Denali. Damn shame, the Denali was a great vehicle when we got it. In my estimation, the best bang for the buck at the time.

 

[Katshot]

Its funny how you go out with all this money to spend, thinking 50-60k will give you all the choices in the world, and then very quickly it comes down to 1 or 2 things.

Im staying away from Nav systems and things like that, so the X5 is suppose to be around 58k, not great but i'll live

Yeah well, I'm gonna guess you're also not getting 4.6is either.
When I priced out an X5 I was close to 70K list, 63 and change invoice. That's just too much for me to spend on that little truck. It's hot looking and all, and it IS a BMW, but there's a limit to what I'll pay for that stuff. To be honest, if money was no issue and my wife's opinion didn't matter, I hate to say it but I think I would still get the FX45.
I just love the look of that thing. Believe me, I'm certainly not saying it's worth what they're asking. But if money was no option............

And you're SO RIGHT about going out with 'X' amount of money to spend and finding out you have very few choices.
We wanted to stay under 60K and were shocked how fast the field of posibilities shrunk. It's like that Auto Trader ad on TV where they start out with this HUGE field of cars and then it gets smaller everytime the guy states one of his parameters. But still one would think that for 60K you would EASILY find a vehicle you like.

 

[Katshot]

Funny you should mention that about the '04 changes. I JUST read the article in Automotive News last night. It didn't mention anything about a 4.8 though. Sounds NICE.
One question though, how the hell are you comfortable in that X5 when you've mentioned in many posts about how big you are? The cabin's kind of cramped to me.

 

[Katshot]

Going back to "big-block" large displacement engines would be REAL risky for anyone at this time.
Also packaging would be difficult and unless you use a rear-mounted trans axle like in the Vette, weight distribution would certainly be an issue for the chassis guys. I agree that there's little that can replace the feel of those old engines but technology IS coming up with some strong possibilities. Thanks to variable cam timing and forced induction systems, a small engine CAN give pretty monsterous power down low and up high in the rev range.

 

[Katshot]

Sorry Angela, I just call 'em like I see 'em. It's pretty easy to see that you're not only very knowledgable but level-headed too. That's something I have to respect.
As for the ol' "deuce and a quarter", hell yeah, THAT's some power. I remember years ago, having to do a double down-shift on my Honda 750 to beat a guy in a Buick 225 w/455 when going from a 70mph punch on the highway. It was ALMOST embarrassing.