GM January '17 sales down 3.8%

[PREMiERdrum]

You don't know what GM may do with the platform(s). The Camaro just being on the "Cadillac" platform alone indicates GM will share it's platforms across the company to cut cost. In fact which luxury sedan or sports car had a year-to-year gain in the past 5 years?.

 

Camaro was a late, late, late add to the Alpha program to try and salvage some volume amid hemorrhaging development cost and axing of planned derivatives. The migration of Camaro onto this platform with inherent packaging issues has yielded what is likely the most competently sporting pony car ever that nobody really wants to buy.

[akirby]

 

the XTS is the product that they don't want to be around, though it surely has to have the best ROI and of late has been their strongest seller. Go figure.

 

And it must be killing Johan...

[grbeck]

I believe that the XT5 is considerably more expensive than the old SRX - they were heavily discounted almost from the beginning. It's important to remember that when comparing XT5 sales to sales of the SRX. Isn't Cadillac working on a smaller crossover - the XT3 - to slot below the XT5 in size and price?

 

As for the new Camaro - GM managed to repeat the same mistake it made in the final F-bodies. Namely, the car provides great handling and performance in a package that is simply a pain-in-the-rear to live with on a daily basis.

[akirby]

Isn't Cadillac working on a smaller crossover - the XT3 - to slot below the XT5 in size and price?

 

Yes, and that should actually help keep XT5 ATPs higher. This is slightly different than the ATS/CTS situation - this should actually increase sales and share rather than splitting it between two vehicles.

[silvrsvt]

As for the new Camaro - GM managed to repeat the same mistake it made in the final F-bodies. Namely, the car provides great handling and performance in a package that is simply a pain-in-the-rear to live with on a daily basis.

 

You'd think they'd learn by now...it doesn't help that the car looks more like a refresh vs a wholly new car/platform styling wise.

[rmc523]

.

Edited February 2, 2017 by rmc523

[rmc523]

 

Jesus take the wheel.. I stopped reading down the list once I hit ELR.

 

No intent there... the XTS is the product that they don't want to be around, though it surely has to have the best ROI and of late has been their strongest seller. Go figure.

 

I always find it annoying that GM/Caddy lists their vehicles in alphabetical order rather than how the vehicles are positioned in the lineup....so you end up with XTS at the bottom, while the other sedans are at the top because they start with A and C.

 

So do that mean Cadillac have to sale vehicles only based on Chebbies?. Lexus bestsellers are based on the Camry and Highlander didn't stop them to offer $90k cars, Benz have a full commercial lineup across the world but here it's "Luxury", BMW is mostly 2-4 Series but you have the 7-Series. Putting your best is what luxury is about while having a model(s) carry the the load, not stressing mid-America "luxury" isn't what this game about. The XTS go a total reprieve from Detroit so it looks like it will be Caddy's fleet car.

 

You don't know what GM may do with the platform(s). The Camaro just being on the "Cadillac" platform alone indicates GM will share it's platforms across the company to cut cost. In fact which luxury sedan or sports car had a year-to-year gain in the past 5 years?.

 

No, that's not what I said. My point was they've spent tens of billions and have prioritized creating several platforms - only to replace those platforms after one generation, now resulting in their two current multi-billion dollar platforms (Alpha and Omega) - that underpin 3 "BMW-fighter" canyon carving sedans in declining segments, while ignoring other growing segments like crossovers. They can develop sedans, but their way of doing it is inefficient and wasteful to say the least.

 

Furthermore, all 3 sedans look identical, so it's not as if there's been any big advancements design-wise to support the investment.

 

As PD said, Camaro was a late addition to try to salvage the platform specifically because it doesn't work for anything else (furthering my point of it being a waste - or at least inefficient use - of resources). There's talk that Alpha isn't capable of underpinning the logical crossover counterparts to the ATS/CTS.

 

Mustang was up 2015 over 2014, and while down 2016 over 2015, 2016 numbers were over 2014 numbers.

 

Continental outsold its MKS predecessor for the year in just 5 months.

 

I believe that the XT5 is considerably more expensive than the old SRX - they were heavily discounted almost from the beginning. It's important to remember that when comparing XT5 sales to sales of the SRX. Isn't Cadillac working on a smaller crossover - the XT3 - to slot below the XT5 in size and price?

 

As for the new Camaro - GM managed to repeat the same mistake it made in the final F-bodies. Namely, the car provides great handling and performance in a package that is simply a pain-in-the-rear to live with on a daily basis.

 

Yeah, they were giving SRX's away. That's also correct - they are working on an XT3.

 

Visibility out of the Camaro is horrendous.....almost to the point where it may as well not have windows.

 

 

Yes, and that should actually help keep XT5 ATPs higher. This is slightly different than the ATS/CTS situation - this should actually increase sales and share rather than splitting it between two vehicles.

 

Yeah, exactly - with ATS/CTS, its predecessor was a tweener size that served both markets, but then they slotted ATS below Sigma CTS size, while adding a larger, much more expensive CTS above it, as you said splitting the sales in two.

 

XT5 will stay roughly the same size (maybe a slight increase with the next gen as vehicles tend to do), with XT3 just slotting beneath it size and price wise, much like MKC came in below MKX. It will be interesting, though, to see if/how XT5 sales are affected by the addition of XT3. I know there'd be some changeover, as I personally believe XT5 sales numbers benefit from it being the only crossover in the lineup.....you want a Caddy crossover? It's XT5. Now they'll have another model in there.

[630land]

Trying to push "BMW 3 Series fighters" is a waste of time. Example: Lutz trying to call Pontiac "American BMW", why not just be itself? With BMW selling more CUV's, why bother anymore? Do they really need tweedy/preppie Buff Books' approval? Most buyers today could care less.

 

Just let the brands be at their best. Seems to be working for the Continental and MKZ.

[Fgts]

Trying to push "BMW 3 Series fighters" is a waste of time. Example: Lutz trying to call Pontiac "American BMW", why not just be itself? With BMW selling more CUV's, why bother anymore? Do they really need tweedy/preppie Buff Books' approval? Most buyers today could care less.

 

Just let the brands be at their best. Seems to be working for the Continental and MKZ.

Seeing it's Caddy's 2nd bestseller car behind XTS someone wants something other then a BMW, thou it don't have the 40 year head start as the Bimmer. People want a "traditional" Caddy can look across the showroom for an XTS or CT6.

[akirby]

It may be 2nd car but it's 5th overall and it's the cheapest car and selling < 1K units/month. That's not a successful recipe.

[jpd80]

This is an example of two technically excellent cars that just cannot get market traction.

I wonder if the market really wanted or even asked for an alternative to BMW 3 and 5 series cars,

With comparatively low sales impact, either they are overpriced or not what the market wants.

[jpd80]

Yeah, exactly - with ATS/CTS, its predecessor was a tweener size that served both markets, but then they slotted ATS below Sigma CTS size, while adding a larger, much more expensive CTS above it, as you said splitting the sales in two.

But worse than that, Cadillac ran discounted Sigma CTS up against the ATS for the first 12 months.

I think that's when the damage was done and the push back from buyers via sales staff was that

the cars were just too expensive, that sticker shock was the big impasse that continued with CTS.

 

In hindsight, what would it have hurt to have delivered just one car, the Alpha CTS and simply

continued the Sigma CTS pricing structure and making a affordable V8 option available?

2.0T CTS would then cover the ATS $34K entry point, the V6 to start at $39K and V8 at $44K.

 

 

GM ripped up the CTS playbook so it could go chase BMW and in doing, so Cadillac threw away

most of its CTS customer base who just went off and bought other products instead. The uniqueness

of the 'tweener CTS was lost when Cadillac decided to split the car in two and copy BMW 3 and 5 series.

Edited February 3, 2017 by jpd80

[akirby]

I think a CTS coupe/convertible would have been just as successful. Caddy buyers don't want small cars.

[bzcat]

This is an example of two technically excellent cars that just cannot get market traction.

I wonder if the market really wanted or even asked for an alternative to BMW 3 and 5 series cars,

With comparatively low sales impact, either they are overpriced or not what the market wants.

 

Cadillac did extensive focus group before and during Alpha program development and I'm sure this is what luxury car owners told them... that it needs to have products similar to the class leaders.

 

The Omega program on the other hand, is mainly driven by China.

 

I think arguably, Alpha is a little bit backwards looking because Cadillac end up benchmarking CTS and ATS with previous generation BMW 5 and 3 series but they did what the market asked for. What they didn't anticipate is that the "market" didn't think Cadillac belongs in it. The people Cadillac focus grouped probably will not buy one no matter what Cadillac made. In another word, their definition of the market was probably too narrow - they looked at people who were buying BMW and Mercedes but they didn't hear enough from people buying Acura, Volvo, or the FWD Lexus models.

[silvrsvt]

 

Cadillac did extensive focus group before and during Alpha program development and I'm sure this is what luxury car owners told them... that it needs to have products similar to the class leaders.

 

The Omega program on the other hand, is mainly driven by China.

 

I think arguably, Alpha is a little bit backwards looking because Cadillac end up benchmarking CTS and ATS with previous generation BMW 5 and 3 series but they did what the market asked for. What they didn't anticipate is that the "market" didn't think Cadillac belongs in it. The people Cadillac focus grouped probably will not buy one no matter what Cadillac made. In another word, their definition of the market was probably too narrow - they looked at people who were buying BMW and Mercedes but they didn't hear enough from people buying Acura, Volvo, or the FWD Lexus models.

 

And the market moving to CUVs doesn't help either with sedan sales..though the Conti so far seems to be bucking that trend.

[Fgts]

But worse than that, Cadillac ran discounted Sigma CTS up against the ATS for the first 12 months.

I think that's when the damage was done and the push back from buyers via sales staff was that

the cars were just too expensive, that sticker shock was the big impasse that continued with CTS.

 

In hindsight, what would it have hurt to have delivered just one car, the Alpha CTS and simply

continued the Sigma CTS pricing structure and making a affordable V8 option available?

2.0T CTS would then cover the ATS $34K entry point, the V6 to start at $39K and V8 at $44K.

 

 

GM ripped up the CTS playbook so it could go chase BMW and in doing, so Cadillac threw away

most of its CTS customer base who just went off and bought other products instead. The uniqueness

of the 'tweener CTS was lost when Cadillac decided to split the car in two and copy BMW 3 and 5 series.

Is this $44k v8 CTS on the same dealer lot as the $19k base Mustang with crank windows, no a/c and 5.0 power?...

 

My guess is those buyers went to SRX or XTS. The general class of cars where ATS and CTS is down overall, check how many E-Class and GS is moving these days, its not much. I believe the overall plan is Camaro, ATS, CTS will get periodical updates while staying on Alpha.

[fuzzymoomoo]

Lol you think the base Mustang has crank windows

[jpd80]

 

Cadillac did extensive focus group before and during Alpha program development and I'm sure this is what luxury car owners told them... that it needs to have products similar to the class leaders.

Or was the focus group shown two "cars' to evaluate their perceptions?

 

I think arguably, Alpha is a little bit backwards looking because Cadillac end up benchmarking CTS and ATS with previous generation BMW 5 and 3 series but they did what the market asked for. What they didn't anticipate is that the "market" didn't think Cadillac belongs in it. The people Cadillac focus grouped probably will not buy one no matter what Cadillac made. In another word, their definition of the market was probably too narrow - they looked at people who were buying BMW and Mercedes but they didn't hear enough from people buying Acura, Volvo, or the FWD Lexus models.

 

I have a hunch that the market research was a little steered to get two cars over the line,

you even see a concession for China with the ATS-L - that should show up all kinds of red flags

that maybe one car size was all that was really needed.

[jpd80]

Is this $44k v8 CTS on the same dealer lot as the $19k base Mustang with crank windows, no a/c and 5.0 power?...

 

My guess is those buyers went to SRX or XTS. The general class of cars where ATS and CTS is down overall, check how many E-Class and GS is moving these days, its not much. I believe the overall plan is Camaro, ATS, CTS will get periodical updates while staying on Alpha.

No but a near $40K Camaro is on a similar parking lot as a $32K Mustang and that's emblematic of GM's

premium pricing. Considering the low value perception of the Chevrolet SS, $44K for a CTS V8 would

indeed be kick ass value.

 

No doubt, many buyers have left the compact and Mid-sized luxury car segments but you don't attract buyers to

those vehicles by offering ersatz 2.0T and V6 engines while denying them the premium experience of a 6.2 V8,

 

High praise for delivering a brilliant chassis but to deny those buyers the the V8 sizzle is to give BMW the easy win.

The onslaught of Utilities means that any cars that do survive will have to be extremely attractive to those niche buyers

The current premium pricing plan is not working, Cadillac needs to listen toits car buyers and respond accordingly,

 

By comparison, you get a mid-sized MKZ starting at $35k as either hybrid or 2.0T but then grows to a 400 HP

3.0TTV6 for a reasonable $39K as FWD or $43K as AWD. Surely on the back of that, a RWD V8 CTS is not

a giant leap of faith....

Edited February 3, 2017 by jpd80

[Fgts]

No but a near $40K Camaro is on a similar parking lot as a $32K Mustang and that's emblematic of GM's

premium pricing. Considering the low value perception of the Chevrolet SS, $44K for a CTS V8 would

indeed be kick ass value.

 

You mean a $40k Mustang GT screams "value" also?, there's no way this magical $40k v8 CTS will exist and still be a Cadillac. The SS ranged up to $50k with a $42k starting price on an old platform. Could we see a decontented Alpha Chevy or Buick v8 sedan remains to be seen.

No doubt, many buyers have left the compact and Mid-sized luxury car segments but you don't attract buyers to

those vehicles by offering ersatz 2.0T and V6 engines while denying them the premium experience of a 6.2 V8,

 

You can get a 6.2 CTS for $80k.. .The upcoming n/a dohc 6.2 could be a cheaper alternative but i wouldn't be expected to be priced under $65-70k.

High praise for delivering a brilliant chassis but to deny those buyers the the V8 sizzle is to give BMW the easy win.

The onslaught of Utilities means that any cars that do survive will have to be extremely attractive to those niche buyers

The current premium pricing plan is not working, Cadillac needs to listen toits car buyers and respond accordingly,

 

The V-cars?

By comparison, you get a mid-sized MKZ starting at $35k as either hybrid or 2.0T but then grows to a 400 HP

3.0TTV6 for a reasonable $39K as FWD or $43K as AWD. Surely on the back of that, a RWD V8 CTS is not

a giant leap of faith....

CTS isn't even in the same category as MKZ ,the Regal would compete against MKZ, ES350, TL and such.

[jpvbs]

I saw an article (lost the link though) that said Cadillac sold more cars in China in January than they did in the US. It didn't provide a model breakdown of sales though. What models are they selling in China and where are they sourced from?

[twintornados]

I saw an article (lost the link though) that said Cadillac sold more cars in China in January than they did in the US. It didn't provide a model breakdown of sales though. What models are they selling in China and where are they sourced from?

.

From what I can see on the Cadillac China site, it looks like ATS-L | XT5 | CT6 | XTS

 

If I remember correctly, all of the Cadillac's for the Chinese market are made in China...

[rmc523]

I saw an article (lost the link though) that said Cadillac sold more cars in China in January than they did in the US. It didn't provide a model breakdown of sales though. What models are they selling in China and where are they sourced from?

I have the numbers at home. It was about 18K vs 10K for the US.

[RichardJensen]

Seeing it's Caddy's 2nd bestseller car

 

Ah yes, second best as in 'second place is a set of steak knives.'

[jpd80]

I saw an article (lost the link though) that said Cadillac sold more cars in China in January than they did in the US. It didn't provide a model breakdown of sales though. What models are they selling in China and where are they sourced from?

From a post on GMI:

Originally Posted by sfbreh

Let's try:

 

http://media.cadillac.com/media/us/e...lac-sales.html

http://media.cadillac.com/media/us/e...lac-sales.html

 

Total sales were: 28,764

ATS improved: 63.8% over 3,895 = 6,380

XTS improved: 29.3% over 5,033 = 6,508

XT5 sold: 11,880

Escalade sold: ~2,197 (US only)

CTS sold: ~691 (US only)

REMAINDER: 1,108

In the US, CT6 sold: 634

REMAINDER: 474

 

Edited February 5, 2017 by jpd80