Cadillac Going Back To Names for EVs

Altho the center of gravity is somewhat lower than a 911 with an aluminum 6 (not a hard spec that's on anyone's radar), the Taycan is like 5150 lbs- ungodly heavy. Obviously it's quick on the straights but that incredible weight is the antithesis of high performance handling... and if porsche is getting good handling out of it too, it has to be under tremendous component stress. Just goes against what a sports car is supposed to be.

1 hour ago, oldshurst442 said:

The rumour is that GM makes money on an 80 000 C8 Vette.  They lose money below that.

Going to state this again, because I believe the narrative should be set straight. People LOVE to postulate that GM is losing money on everything.
This 'under $80K = loss' theory is conjecture based on the fact that GM originally targeted the price of the C8 to be $80K.
Who in their right mind would think GM would intentionally set a price to make no profit on a Corvette?

Think about it.

Now, while it's possible that GM loses money at $60K, we don't know that for sure and we have no idea, if so, the dollar amount per car.
 

32 minutes ago, balthazar said:

Altho the center of gravity is somewhat lower than a 911 with an aluminum 6 (not a hard spec that's on anyone's radar), the Taycan is like 5150 lbs- ungodly heavy. Obviously it's quick on the straights but that incredible weight is the antithesis of high performance handling... and if porsche is getting good handling out of it too, it has to be under tremendous component stress. Just goes against what a sports car is supposed to be.

All EV’s are heavy.

I also don’t think it matters if GM loses money on C8’s under $80k.  It is good for consumers and That can be an overall business strategy.  I just wouldn’t be surprised if prices rise in the next couple years like Nissan did with the GT-R.

36 minutes ago, balthazar said:

Going to state this again, because I believe the narrative should be set straight. People LOVE to postulate that GM is losing money on everything.
This 'under $80K = loss' theory is conjecture based on the fact that GM originally targeted the price of the C8 to be $80K.
Who in their right mind would think GM would intentionally set a price to make no profit on a Corvette?

Think about it.

Now, while it's possible that GM loses money at $60K, we don't know that for sure and we have no idea, if so, the dollar amount per car.
 

He only makes those kind of statements because its easier than acknowledging his favorite brands own shortcomings. 

1 hour ago, smk4565 said:

VW is about double the size of GM, they are massive.  They aren't going to lose their shirts in EV's and go bankrupt, if anything they have the best chance to the the world's EV leader.  

Porsche has the Nurburgring record for a production EV as it is with the Taycan, I know Model S is chasing that.  As far as racing goes, Mercedes leads Formula E right now in their first season, but it is like 2 races in so long way for that to go.  But Mercedes, Porsche, Audi, BMW and Jaguar are all in there, I'd love to see GM or Ford jump in and challenge, just like I'd love to see either enter Formula 1.  Bring it on.

I actually like the C8 Corvette, I think it is an engineering masterpiece given the price point even at $80-90k it is.  Not sure where the C8 tech trickles down to when GM is killing all their cars in favor of front drive crossovers and GM refuses to do performance crossovers.  But the performance they got, the price point, the usability of the C8 are great achievements.  Mid-engine 2-seaters aren't really my thing though, like Ferraris have zero appeal to me, I can appreciate the performance and engineering that went into it, but it isn't my sort of car.

What does being “double the size” have to do with anything? How big was Tesla? How big are they now? Maybe size has not jack to do with whether one can succeed on such a front and has more to do with the ability to successfully execute said plans. 

1 hour ago, smk4565 said:

I also don’t think it matters if GM loses money on C8’s under $80k.

^ There's one now.  😆

9 hours ago, surreal1272 said:

He only makes those kind of statements because its easier than acknowledging his favorite brands own shortcomings. 

What does being “double the size” have to do with anything? How big was Tesla? How big are they now? Maybe size has not jack to do with whether one can succeed on such a front and has more to do with the ability to successfully execute said plans. 

VW has money.  They can put out a ton of EV’s if market demand is there.  Tesla can’t put out product that fast.  VW could easily be the largest EV producer in the world in 5 years time.
 

Tesla has a profitability issue, how long can they last not making any money?  And personally I’d prefer a Tesla to a VW group EV.   

8 hours ago, balthazar said:

^ There's one now.  😆

All retail businesses have loss leaders.  Corvette can drive showroom traffic and brands need halo product even if they lose money on it.  Without a halo product you get brands like Infiniti that are dead in the water.  I suspect Corvette  overall will make profit due to how many optioned up ones they sell.

1 hour ago, smk4565 said:

VW has money.  They can put out a ton of EV’s if market demand is there.  Tesla can’t put out product that fast.  VW could easily be the largest EV producer in the world in 5 years time.
 

Tesla has a profitability issue, how long can they last not making any money?  And personally I’d prefer a Tesla to a VW group EV.   

Could have, would have, should have, but VW hasn’t. That’s the flaw in your entire premise while trying to take a $h! on GMs EV efforts. It’s the same argument you were using for Daimler over the last two years until they said “Oop, we are not quite ready to fail yet”. Now you want to bring up Porsche, VW, or whoever the hell else suits whatever trolling argument you are trying to make here. 
 

Yeah, the best or nothing is definitely ringing true here. 

2 hours ago, surreal1272 said:

Could have, would have, should have, but VW hasn’t. That’s the flaw in your entire premise while trying to take a $h! on GMs EV efforts. It’s the same argument you were using for Daimler over the last two years until they said “Oop, we are not quite ready to fail yet”. Now you want to bring up Porsche, VW, or whoever the hell else suits whatever trolling argument you are trying to make here. 
 

Yeah, the best or nothing is definitely ringing true here. 

VW has 2 EV’s on sale now and many coming.  But I haven’t crapped on GM’s EV efforts.   I said Cadillac doesn’t have the image of other luxury brands so they can’t sell on status.  I said Cadillac needs really good EV product.  I think real names is a good idea but the vehicles have to be really good and arrive soon before the market is flooded.

On 12/14/2019 at 9:12 AM, smk4565 said:

Cadillac doesn't have to beat out everyone, but they aren't a top status symbol brand, they don't have a great image.  If Cadillac puts out a car that matches specs with the Tesla in every way shape and form and costs exactly the same, the Tesla will outsell it easily on name alone.  

GM doesn't break out brand profits so we don't know how profitable any of the brands are.  I would assume that all make profit, but we don't know how much.

Again, your wrong on Cadillac. I consider it a top status brand and much better than the plastic crap the brand you think is best MB. Plenty of People do not think much of the Lease 99% of the time German brands.I find so much dumped CPO that is at low prices that they ship them out of state because there is so much. I question just how much profit your love fest of MB really has when you see the amount of CHURN that brand has.

Small volume high profit can provide much in changing a brand to the next future way of doing business. Mary clearly is seeing a different world view than you see.

1 hour ago, dfelt said:

Again, your wrong on Cadillac. I consider it a top status brand and much better than the plastic crap the brand you think is best MB. Plenty of People do not think much of the Lease 99% of the time German brands.I find so much dumped CPO that is at low prices that they ship them out of state because there is so much. I question just how much profit your love fest of MB really has when you see the amount of CHURN that brand has.

Small volume high profit can provide much in changing a brand to the next future way of doing business. Mary clearly is seeing a different world view than you see.

Cadillac doesn't have a convertible or sports car, doesn't have an performance SUV, doesn't have any thing over $100k, and they moved CT4 and CT5 down market of where ATS and CTS were because ATS and CTS couldn't get German car pricing and I think Cadillac made the correct move there.  But Cadillac isn't top tier until they have top tier product, where is the $200,000 Cadillac?

"Small volume" is an excuse for poor sales, I am sure GM would love to sell twice as many Cadillacs as they do today, especially if the profit margins are better on Cadillacs than they are on a Chevy or Buick.  

16 hours ago, balthazar said:

Going to state this again, because I believe the narrative should be set straight. People LOVE to postulate that GM is losing money on everything.
This 'under $80K = loss' theory is conjecture based on the fact that GM originally targeted the price of the C8 to be $80K.
Who in their right mind would think GM would intentionally set a price to make no profit on a Corvette?

Think about it.

Now, while it's possible that GM loses money at $60K, we don't know that for sure and we have no idea, if so, the dollar amount per car.
 

I more inclined to take this approach.

@smk4565 mentioned loss leaders.

Those are traditionally the entry level cars.   The Corvette is NOT by ANY means an entry level loss leader type of car.

More often than not, companies lose money on specialty cars like Lexus and its LFA. But that was more of a mismanaged project. Too many engineering changes. And when companies lose money on specialty projects its often because their business model was flawed from the get-go...

Corvette has been well thought of for the last 20 years, since the C5 on how to make money on it. A STRONG business case was made to keep it after the C5 AND after the bankruptcy and a strong business plan to make money on its low volume was surely and undoubtedly been implemented. 

I bet Acura loses money on the NSX because they sell so few of them.  Or maybe after so many years of it on market it will break even as they recoup R&D and tooling costs.  

With Corvette it seems only the low priced ones will lose money, but I suspect when all the special trim ones come out that cost over $100k they will clean up on those and make a nice profit on them.   Much like the $35,000 Tesla Model 3, they probably lose money on that but make money on the $65,000 performance model.

NSX is less advanced than the C8; it might only cost $45K to build. MSRP is $157K. Even with the $20K off a '19, they have to be raking it in on the NSX, even at 2018's 170 units sold.

2 hours ago, smk4565 said:

I bet Acura loses money on the NSX because they sell so few of them.  Or maybe after so many years of it on market it will break even as they recoup R&D and tooling costs.  

With Corvette it seems only the low priced ones will lose money, but I suspect when all the special trim ones come out that cost over $100k they will clean up on those and make a nice profit on them.   Much like the $35,000 Tesla Model 3, they probably lose money on that but make money on the $65,000 performance model.

I bet you don’t have a clue who is losing money on what unless they tell you. I suspect the same applies here in regards to the NSX and Corvette. The Vette itself has never been a money loser for Chevy and GM and there is no reason to think that is now.

"B-but a Motor Trend article said a senior GM employee said they originally wanted the Corvette to start at $80K, so anything under that has to mean they're losing money."

1 hour ago, balthazar said:

NSX is less advanced than the C8; it might only cost $45K to build. MSRP is $157K. Even with the $20K off a '19, they have to be raking it in on the NSX, even at 2018's 170 units sold.

NSX does have turbos and a hybrid drivetrain.  I would say it is more advanced than a Corvette, but the NSX is a total rip off as far as price goes.

Also doesn't matter if NSX makes money or loses it, I think they should price it at like $90k, even if they lose money on every one sold, they need to push that more as a halo product to promote their brand image which right now is pretty lack luster.  

• Of course you would.

• Turbos aren't a high dollar advancement. My son's Sonic has a turbo, in fact all 3 Chevys here are turbocharged. Chevy's been building turbocharged vehicles since 1962.

• How the hell could they lose money at $90K?? Are they stuffing $50K in the glovebox?

34 minutes ago, balthazar said:

"B-but a Motor Trend article said a senior GM employee said they originally wanted the Corvette to start at $80K, so anything under that has to mean they're losing money."

So that is how the rumour started?  From a stupid Motor Trend article?

Motor Trend was never a highly reliable source of facts on automobiles and the like, but it has become quite the tabloid media as of late...

The dyno test of the C8 last month should gives us a clue as to what drivel comes out of that rag tag mag. 

2 hours ago, smk4565 said:

NSX does have turbos and a hybrid drivetrain.  I would say it is more advanced than a Corvette, but the NSX is a total rip off as far as price goes.

Also doesn't matter if NSX makes money or loses it, I think they should price it at like $90k, even if they lose money on every one sold, they need to push that more as a halo product to promote their brand image which right now is pretty lack luster.  

All I know for certain is that its a good thing you are not in charge of ANY car company.

Nothing Cadillac has come out with new in the last year or two has been remotely desirable next to their respective competitors. There is no way their brand image has the status of Mercedes, Audi, or BMW. 

15 hours ago, balthazar said:

• Of course you would.

• Turbos aren't a high dollar advancement. My son's Sonic has a turbo, in fact all 3 Chevys here are turbocharged. Chevy's been building turbocharged vehicles since 1962.

• How the hell could they lose money at $90K?? Are they stuffing $50K in the glovebox?

Right it is an Accord V6 with 2 turbos and a hybrid system, it can’t cost $150k to make so they should sell it for less money 

It's the R&D that costs all of the money they're accounting to when referencing a "loss". At least that's how I view it. 

I can't imagine parts and labor to assemble would cost THAT much. 

On 12/14/2019 at 6:48 PM, smk4565 said:

They delayed 1 EV on sale date.  EQ A and EQ B test mules are out there, those are both probably 2021 arrivals as is EQ S.  Daimler has a zero emission carbon neutral goal as a company by 2040, that is for cars and factories.  So that push is going to come hard.

I personally would put EQ C on sale now and see what happens, Mercedes is a better badge than Jaguar or Audi and the EQ C looks better than their vehicle and is priced better than them also.  I think it would sell jut fine, and if they only sell 10,000 all year who cares, it is 10,000 people that didn't go somewhere else.

I would gird your loins for the anouncement that the EQA and EQB will end up being Europe or China only as MB delays to 2023 global EV production at the Earliest. Plenty of news story's but MB is having Battery production problems that started in Feb 2019 and continue still now.

https://www.carscoops.com/2019/02/mercedes-benz-eqc-delayed-three-months-due-battery-production-issues/

On top of this MB has anounced that their US Production plant will now supply their North America EV's with batteries further delaying their release due to the added weight of the auto's in shipment.

Also for Asia, they just started a battery production plant as China cannot come online fast enough.

https://insideevs.com/news/386148/mercedes-benz-battery-production-phev/

Clearly MB can build the auto, getting the battery packs to power said EVs is going to take another year and the focus is Europe and China over the rest of the world. MB will not be done with the US plant expansion till next summer then training, bringing everything online, your looking at 2021 selling models at 2022 at the earliest with reality that they will have EV options in 2023 sitting on the lots for consideration. about the same time that Cadillac, Lincoln, and many other OEMs have stated they will have choices too.

End result is MB is Following everyone else, NOT Leading them.

F1 EV racing also is nothing special for MB as they will use the same set platform as everyone else, so it comes down to the drivers skill. Again NOT MB Technology.