Jump to content

Cadillac Fires de Nyychen


mackinaw

Recommended Posts

I have a feeling profits played a big role as well. When he pitched a fit about moving to NY the GM comments at the time hinted that they were giving him more control but they were also going to hold him accountable for results. I took it as "Ok fine we'll give you what you want but you have a short leash to make it work." Car sales weren't what he expected and he has no plan for mid and large utilities to keep up with a changing market. And I suspect profits weren't very good either.

 

It's not a coincidence this is the 3rd major mfr he's left. I'd be shocked if a fourth one gave him a chance.

 

That's a good point too.

 

.

Pure speculation on my part, but, I would be willing to bet that Hyundai would pick him up to run/lead Genesis...

 

Maybe he can change their alphanumeric system too :stirpot:

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Just reading between the lines he must not have been willing to invest in Escalade and I don't think the XT6 will be

Why you keep saying that?, the Escalade gone through 2 generations before the new current Navigator came out. The Escalade got a new transmission and interior since 15', they suppose to come with a new Escalade every 3 years?.

competitive with Aviator either in looks or performance since it's still a transverse FWD platform. I just don't think what he had planned was going to be competitive enough to keep up with Ford on the utility side.

Lincoln CUVs won't match Caddy CUVs sellswise, even with more utes now still can't match just the XT5.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why you keep saying that?, the Escalade gone through 2 generations before the new current Navigator came out. The Escalade got a new transmission and interior since 15', they suppose to come with a new Escalade every 3 years?.

 

Lincoln CUVs won't match Caddy CUVs sellswise, even with more utes now still can't match just the XT5.

 

Why did they have to put $10K on the hood of the Escalade? I'm just guessing here but I don't think GM bosses liked what Johan had planned for XT6 and Escalade compared to what they're seeing from Ford. XT6 is to Aviator what Continental was to CT6 except XT6 is far more ugly. Maybe they don't think the next gen Escalade would compete well with the new Navigator.

 

I just don't see Johan putting much effort into utilities.

 

And again - sales are not profits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Lincoln CUVs won't match Caddy CUVs sellswise, even with more utes now still can't match just the XT5.

The fact I can get an mid line XT5 for under $350 a month with nothing down has a lot to do with those sales. You are hard pressed to get an mid-line MKC for that payment, and a mid-line MKX would be $150+ more per month. The resale value for both is about the same so GM is just taking a huge hit on the backside.

 

50% of their sales come from China now, it is not like they are taking back US market share in huge quantity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Why did they have to put $10K on the hood of the Escalade? I'm just guessing here but I don't think GM bosses liked what Johan had planned for XT6 and Escalade compared to what they're seeing from Ford. XT6 is to Aviator what Continental was to CT6 except XT6 is far more ugly. Maybe they don't think the next gen Escalade would compete well with the new Navigator.

The same as Ford putting thousands on the hood of an F150 so buyers won't end-up at a GM dealer, it's competition. Seeing the current Continental being cancelled and matching CT6 sellswise despite being thousands less isn't a good example, A luxury fwd CUV sounds exactly what GM brass wants maybe JDN left because of that, plus sounds like you seen/drove the XT6 already.

 

I just don't see Johan putting much effort into utilities.

 

And again - sales are not profits.

And yet 4 utes were worked on during his tenure. With Utes/SUVs carrying Cadillacs purses and GM making profits since the BK, things are looking up.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The same as Ford putting thousands on the hood of an F150 so buyers won't end-up at a GM dealer, it's competition. Seeing the current Continental being cancelled and matching CT6 sellswise despite being thousands less isn't a good example, A luxury fwd CUV sounds exactly what GM brass wants maybe JDN left because of that, plus sounds like you seen/drove the XT6 already.

 

 

And yet 4 utes were worked on during his tenure. With Utes/SUVs carrying Cadillacs purses and GM making profits since the BK, things are looking up.

 

You are as clueless as rperez. If Caddy was in as good shape on utilities as you claim they would not have fired Johan specifically because of utilities. Also it's not just what is out there today but what he was planning (or not planning) over the next 5 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

You are as clueless as rperez. If Caddy was in as good shape on utilities as you claim they would not have fired Johan specifically because of utilities.

You do know JDN he was Caddy president and not GMs president in case you don't know. How in 3 1/2 years he suppose to put out more CUVs then the platforms that were available at the time?. How come Lincoln not outselling Caddy in utes despite having more models?.

Also it's not just what is out there today but what he was planning (or not planning) over the next 5 years.

Do you know what he had planned?.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to all the "know it all's", RWD cars were supposed to be savior of US makers. "Ford should have bring us the Falcon". (Australian buyers quit them, saying for bogans)

 

We'll, look at how bad the Alpha platform belly flopped. And the CT6? Good thing Ford brought out new Navigator instead of a 'Panther' replacement.

 

Tire kickers and lookie-loos at Auto Shows don't add to bottom line. They will demand "cars we like", but don't buy, then complain saying , "I wanted to get a good used one in 10 years!"

Edited by 630land
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to all the "know it all's", RWD cars were supposed to be savior of US makers. "Ford should have bring us the Falcon". (Australian buyers quit them, saying for bogans)

 

We'll, look at how bad the Alpha platform belly flopped. And the CT6? Good thing Ford brought out new Navigator instead of a 'Panther' replacement.

 

Tire kickers and lookie-loos at Auto Shows don't add to bottom line. They will demand "cars we like", but don't buy, then complain saying , "I wanted to get a good used one in 10 years!"

 

ATS and CTS have other problems unrelated to RWD, though. Rear seat room is non-existent and the price turned people off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In other news, Cadillac doubled XT5 incentives overnight to 4-6.5K off. Typical GM is clearly back in charge now.

 

 

Autoline Daily weighed in on this today. Cadillac overall sales in the U.S. have declined since Johann took over (182,000 in 2014, 156,000 in 2017). The Board wasn't satisfied with Cadillac's performance in the U.S. market, so fired him.

 

This is what many people worried about when De Nysschen left Cadillac earlier this week. GM's old status quo coming back. De Nysschen challenged that status quo in order to elevate the Cadillac brand as a true contender in the luxury car marketplace. And his efforts succeeded. He developed a long term vision for Cadillac. That's something the brand really needed.

 

U.S. is no longer the driver for most of the top tier luxury car brands. In 2017, less than half of all new Cadillacs sold globally were in the U.S. market. Same situation for BMW, Mercedes-Benz, Audi, Jaguar.

 

In an e-mail to Automotive News, De Nysschen said "I greatly admire and respect the GM top leadership but, in the end, I would conclude that in their opinion, I did not challenge hard enough. Accordingly, they exercised their prerogative to change leadership." It was a tough situation for De Nysschen. http://www.autonews.com/article/20180419/OEM/180419730/cadillac-chief-johan-de-nysschen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If by "GM's old status quo" you mean making money then yes.

 

He built some great cars - that nobody really wants to buy. And he neglected utilities in order to build those cars. And as a result I suspect Cadillac wasn't making much money outside the Escalade which now has fierce competition for a change.

 

He spent too much money on things that don't make money and not enough on the things that can make a lot of money.

 

There is no way you can call that successful on any level. Companies that are successful like that go out of business.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If by "GM's old status quo" you mean making money then yes.

 

He built some great cars - that nobody really wants to buy. And he neglected utilities in order to build those cars. And as a result I suspect Cadillac wasn't making much money outside the Escalade which now has fierce competition for a change.

 

He spent too much money on things that don't make money and not enough on the things that can make a lot of money.

 

There is no way you can call that successful on any level. Companies that are successful like that go out of business.

 

Well, I think he was referring to GM's typical 'throw lots of incentives on its models' tactic as the "GM status quo."

 

GM buyers are, after all, conditioned to wait until the company throws on all their incentives to buy.

Edited by rmc523
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Well, I think he was referring to GM's typical 'throw lots of incentives on its models' tactic as the "GM status quo."

 

GM buyers are, after all, conditioned to wait until the company throws on all their incentives to buy.

 

True but that's also a function of either over-building or not having a competitive product.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Well, I think he was referring to GM's typical 'throw lots of incentives on its models' tactic as the "GM status quo."

 

GM buyers are, after all, conditioned to wait until the company throws on all their incentives to buy.

 

Yes sir. GM did fleet dumping and heavily subsidized leases and other sales incentives with Cadillac years ago in the U.S. That kept sales going. But killed resale values and damaged the brand's reputation. De Nysschen put an end to these and other practices that made people perceive Cadillac as a second tier brand. During the same timeframe GM executives at other divisions also cut down on fleet dumping too for the same reasons. So on that count, De Nysschen and other GM executives should have been in agreement.

 

Cadillac sales trends in the U.S. market may have led to De Nysschen's departure. De Nysschen did the right thing though. U.S. Cadillac sales declined during his term as President (2014-2017). But this was to be expected. Cadillac focused on product excellence, as it should have. Not on selling large numbers of cars to fleets or customers looking for super cheap leases. Last year, Cadillac had the second highest average price among luxury car brands in the U.S. Only JLR was higher.

 

Also, De Nysschen put a lot of effort into building the Cadillac brand in high growth markets outside the U.S. That's where the action is now for luxury car brands. This paid off too for Cadillac. Second highest global sales for Cadillac in 2017, on track for highest sales ever in 116 years in 2018. Cadillac buyers in China for example aren't "conditioned to wait until the company throws on all their incentives to buy". These customers buy new Cadillacs because they are great products.

 

Hopefully, the sales incentives mentioned in post 61 are a temporary thing. It would be really sad if the new Cadillac President focuses too much on short term sales growth in the U.S. at the expense of improving brand perception. That was part of the old GM "status quo".

Edited by rperez817
Link to comment
Share on other sites

They are trying like hell to resurrect Cadillac. Well, I might as well tell you, you might as well sprinkle holy water on them. It's over!

 

Always wanted to say that. ;)

 

http://www.thedetroitbureau.com/2011/06/gm-ceo-disses-lincoln-as-over-downplays-hydrogen-and-ethanol/

 

 

This time, the executive reserved his scorn for Ford’s high-line Lincoln brand, which has admittedly been struggling to find an identity that can finally help rebuild its once-solid position in the luxury market. Despite promises by Ford officials that they are developing a new plant to save the brand, Akerson clearly isn’t worried.

“They are trying like hell to resurrect Lincoln. Well, I might as well tell you, you might as well sprinkle holy water. It’s over,” he said about Cadillac’s historical competitor.

Edited by Assimilator
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

How many bills can I pay with brand perception?

 

If all he was doing was cutting fleet sales then a sales drop wouldn't be a bad thing. But consider how many new vehicles and new platforms were introduced the last 5 years. When you spend that kind of money on new stuff you better meet your sales and profit targets and clearly that didn't happen.

 

I still think Aviator was the nail in the coffin. Execs said "What is our Aviator competitor?" and the answer was XT6 which won't come close to competing with a PHEV 3.0TT RWD crossover with great looks.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And again - sales are not profits.

 

Yes sir. De Nysschen understood this very well. WSJ interviewed him last October and asked him "Three years in, Cadillac continues to lose U.S. market share. What’s holding you

back?"
De Nysschen's answer was the correct one. "In the U.S., the focus is not on growth. If you achieve sales results without looking at the quality of the business, it’s not sustainable. Three or four years ago, Cadillac incentive spending was significantly above the luxury average. We had to instill this discipline. If in the near term it means that we have to walk away from some volume, then so be it."
Partial WSJ article attached.

17-10-26-wsj-the-10-year-plan-to-make-cadillac-cool-again-wsj.pdf

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Yes sir. De Nysschen understood this very well. WSJ interviewed him last October and asked him "Three years in, Cadillac continues to lose U.S. market share. What’s holding you

back?"
De Nysschen's answer was the correct one. "In the U.S., the focus is not on growth. If you achieve sales results without looking at the quality of the business, it’s not sustainable. Three or four years ago, Cadillac incentive spending was significantly above the luxury average. We had to instill this discipline. If in the near term it means that we have to walk away from some volume, then so be it."
Partial WSJ article attached.

 

.

...and it worked out well for him, didn't it.

 

what-me-worry-715605.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He had the right strategy. Where it failed was in the execution.

 

Instead of replacing the original CTS with two vehicles (ATS and CTS) on a new platform, he could have redone CTS on a less expensive platform and still added CT6.

Escalade should have gotten the most attention as the most expensive vehicle and cash cow.

 

XT4, 5 and 6 should have been done earlier instead of ATS and the proposed larger sedan.

 

ELR, wagons and coupes should never have been pursued.

 

Hybrids should have been pursued more vigorously.

 

That could have all been done while still making the changes that he wanted to make.

 

Instead, he pursued his own personal boner for BMW and tried to copy them and prove he could build something just as good. And in doing so he lost sight of cost management and profitability.

 

Sometimes you have to build things you don't want to build to make enough money to build the stuff you want to build.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

He had the right strategy. Where it failed was in the execution.

 

Instead of replacing the original CTS with two vehicles (ATS and CTS) on a new platform, he could have redone CTS on a less expensive platform and still added CT6.

Escalade should have gotten the most attention as the most expensive vehicle and cash cow.

 

XT4, 5 and 6 should have been done earlier instead of ATS and the proposed larger sedan.

 

ELR, wagons and coupes should never have been pursued.

 

Hybrids should have been pursued more vigorously.

 

That could have all been done while still making the changes that he wanted to make.

 

Instead, he pursued his own personal boner for BMW and tried to copy them and prove he could build something just as good. And in doing so he lost sight of cost management and profitability.

 

Sometimes you have to build things you don't want to build to make enough money to build the stuff you want to build.

 

Much of those decisions (ATS, CTS, ELR, wagons) were made before he was there?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...