surreal1272

Mercedes and Lexus have better dealerships than Cadillac, but that isn't why Mercedes and Lexus beat Cadillac.

 

Cadillac's marketing is bad, the product line incomplete, and the ATS uncompetitive in the high volume entry-lex segment.  CTS sells comparable to a GS or A6, you can live with the CTS's sales volume, although more would help.  But when your brand has 2 coupes (if the ELR is still around), 1 crossover and 0 convertibles, you have a product problem, and there is a management problem for letting the brand go this long without essential product.

Dude you just literally have to stop with the damn bar moving. You are literally the only one here who thinks dealerships are not that important when it has been proven to you(on multiple occasions I might add) how wrong you are. Sorry but you don't get to move the bar here anymore. Accept that you were and continue to be wrong and find some thing original to say.

While SMK is trying to move the bar again, I just wanted to point out that as I was passing by the MB dealership, I posted a picture of the other day, I saw that they moved the vans right next to the entrance of the building.

Because nobody buys jaguars, they sell like lamborghini's in the U.S.

He also fails to realize that DUH, of course Mercedes will sell more. They have three times the brand volume of Jaguar. To compare those two as proof of his argument is just weak sauce on a bull$h! sandwich.

If the dealership was so important then Cadillac or Lincoln or Jaguar could just build luxury dealerships and get sales. It doesn't work like that. Copying Lexus's dealership experience would be a lot cheaper than copying their car line.

Rahal owns a Jaguar/Land Rover dealership about 3 miles away from their Mercedes dealership, and the Jaguar dealership is newer and nicer, I would assume equal service since it is the same owner. But they sell a lot more Mercedes than JLR.

I really have no words for your obliviousness on this subject.

Let me just sum this up for you. Dealerships and how they are presented ABSOLUTELY MATTER to most car buyers. If they didn't, then all dealerships would never change, never renovate or update their facilities, and never move their product around within their dealerships. However, they do all that thus killing this weak argument you keep trying to push because you got busted on what Mercedes sells beside their S Class cars.

How about them Craptors?

 

Came back from 17 to win the game. Holy $h!, they're actually capable of playing a shutdown quarter. Now, if they'd only do every quarter, the Pacers would have scored only 36 points in the game.

Craptors?

 

What cha talking about Willis?

The Toronto Raptors after they came back on Indiana last night.

Nevermind.

Honda and Toyota have stand alone dealers too. (Now that Scion is dead . Most car brands have their own building. It is industry common place. Which is why Cadillac should have stand alone dealers, and most Cadillac dealers are stand alone.

I have always said dealership amenities and customer service are important for the service department because people have a lot of alternatives to take their vehicle to for service.

I don't think the dealership plays a big role in the sales decision. If ABC Lexus has the nicest building in the world and XYZ Lexus 40 minutes away is mediocre but has that RX350 in the color you want for $2,000 less than ABC dealership has it, guess what, the customer is driving for the better deal, and the building didn't matter.

An awful dealership can hurt sales, but I think for the most part dealerships are all about the same and aren't winning sales.

But it doesn't work like that because everyone already knows that the Lexus dealership experience was and still is a big key to their success. To dismiss that is just reaffirming your ignorance on the matter for reasons already discussed.

Simply baffling your failure here although honestly not surprising given how blindly you defended Benz while attacking Cadillac until you got called out on it.

And to clarify I do think Cadillac should have stand alone dealers, because Lexus, Infiniti, Acura, BMW, Mercedes, Audi for the most part do, and Jaguar/Land Rover often share a dealership.  All the other luxury brands do a stand alone dealer, except maybe Lincoln that combines with Ford a lot, and look where they are.  It is just the cost of doing business in the luxury market, they all have stand alone dealers.

 

That being said, I don't think the dealership is winning buyers.  There is an Acura dealer next to the Mercedes dealership I get my car serviced at.  They could pave the Acura parking lot in gold in give away free lunches, that isn't going to make me want to buy an Acura, because I don't like Acuras.  

 

The stand alone dealer is just an expectation, like if you go to a restaurant you expect the place to be clean, silverware to be clean, the waiter to bring ice water, take the order in a promo manner, etc.  Those are just basic expectations.  But if you like Italian food and don't like seafood you aren't going to Red Lobster because the wall paper is nicer than what Olive Garden has.  

 

The product matters far more than the building.  Cadillac still has a product problem, but their number 1 problem is marketing.  

Biggest fallacy and weakest argument ever. The fact that you are using your personal bias (in this case, you don't like Acuras) to prove your point officially kills said point. Your personal preference has not one thing to do with the millions of people who clearly feel differently from you about car preferences. That's like me saying that I would never go to a Fiat dealership because I hate Fiats (and I do). That doesn't mean jack squat and it doesn't mean that their dealerships are not important to potential buyers. 

Oh and if a dealership can only get you to come there once (as you put it in your other post), then the dealership and said car are obvious failures. Think about it.

 

 

I think the dealership doesn't have a lot to do with someone's decision on what car to buy.  You are going to be in the dealership once, be in the car every day.  On the service end I think the dealership matters more, as you might go there a few times a year, if you get poor service you will look toward independent mechanics, Midas, Jiffy Lube, etc.  

 

You can have the nicest dealership in the world with champagne flowing from the water fountains, but if you don't have the product to sell, it doesn't matter.

Did it hurt when you had to backpedal like that?

 

It absolutely does have everything to do with people's decisions. How many times have we heard here how wrong it was for Cadillac to be sharing floor space with any other GM make? I know you sure took part in that dog pile but now that you have been shown proof of Mercedes showering their luxury filled lots with Sprinter vans, you say it doesn't matter? Seriously LMAO at that one SMK!

 

It does matter.

 

I have never been one on the campaign for super luxury stand alone dealers.  I always thought it was better if Cadillac had their own dealerships so they aren't thought of as just another GM brand and thought of as more special.  But overall you go to the dealer once to buy the car, then you might never go back.

 

I actually think car companies could sell cars online and skip the dealership system altogether.  Amazon could sell cars with better deals and greater efficiency than any dealership could.  

 

From the dealership standpoint, I think knowledge sales people matter more than what the building looks like, and if you are out on a test drive you aren't in the building anyway.  Dealerships aren't Cadillac's problem.

 

Even in your reply you contradict yourself. You say no campaign on stand alone dealerships but for some reason single out Cadillac and you continued to do so until your own favorite was called out for intermixing their brands at the same dealerships as well. Hell, It literally photographic proof to show you that for a fact. Then you immediately back track with your previous post. 

You cannot continue to make arguments about brand perceptions and then just try to change your stance entirely after being busted on your hypocrisy. Not trying to be a dick here, but that is the simple fact of the matter and I think everyone here just saw it.

One last thing. The dealership most certainly does matter. One only needs to study the history of Lexus to see proof of that. Their cars were always sold on the dealership and service experience. To pretend that the dealership doesn't matter is simply ignorant. Sorry but it is and again I think you are only saying this now because you got busted and called out on it.

^ I hope so. I think that will help the brand more than having the best handling/chassis cars. Image is everything to luxury car buyers. 

Why would anyone possibly down vote that?

Sorry, I know that's off the subject. Carry on.

I think the dealership doesn't have a lot to do with someone's decision on what car to buy.  You are going to be in the dealership once, be in the car every day.  On the service end I think the dealership matters more, as you might go there a few times a year, if you get poor service you will look toward independent mechanics, Midas, Jiffy Lube, etc.  

 

You can have the nicest dealership in the world with champagne flowing from the water fountains, but if you don't have the product to sell, it doesn't matter.

Did it hurt when you had to backpedal like that?

It absolutely does have everything to do with people's decisions. How many times have we heard here how wrong it was for Cadillac to be sharing floor space with any other GM make? I know you sure took part in that dog pile but now that you have been shown proof of Mercedes showering their luxury filled lots with Sprinter vans, you say it doesn't matter? Seriously LMAO at that one SMK!

It does matter.

Its a pre production car. I will wait to pass judgement when these are rolling off the assembly line.

Fair enough. That's the way I look at it right now. I think if they would have used a different color combination it would not look so obvious. I tend to over analyze that kind of stuff with interiors from all my years working in automotive textiles back in the 90s.

That is one piss poor sewing job. My grandma can do better. What lazy quality from the assembly line.

 

 

I am willing to bet that sewing job was not performed on an assembly line.

. And you think it makes it okay given that this was the car they chose to show the automotive world?

 

Didn't say anything of the sort.

Never said you did Cos. I asked a simple question. Do you think it was okay for them to send it like that given all the attention it was going to get?

That is one piss poor sewing job. My grandma can do better. What lazy quality from the assembly line.

 

 

I am willing to bet that sewing job was not performed on an assembly line.

. And you think it makes it okay given that this was the car they chose to show the automotive world?

 

Pre-production cars are just that... pre-production.  There is a possibility of changes to the assembly process or the assembly process not even been fully developed yet.

 ALL manufacturers have pre-production cars that they use to show the public and press.....and all of them have flaws in assembly.   I will never judge a car show debut car on assembly quality, ever.   

 

Sometimes the manufacturer let the Press drive these pre-production cars. Often times, they won't even have a VIN because they are due to be crushed after a certain time. The manufacturer will put a disclaimer sticker in the car somewhere indicating that it is pre-production... and yes.. there will be flaws.

 

Once the actual production Continentals start rolling out, then we can have a looksee to judge.

I understand that but I've seen a lot of preproduction cars and I think what makes this error obvious is the contrast from the stitching to the door panel color. Just looks way too obvious and it would bug me to no end. I would certainly hope this does not happen to a production model.

 

It doesn't even phase me because it was likely done by hand in a design studio on a tight schedule.  It really is a non-issue in a pre-production car.

Oh I agree on that level. Like I said though, I think it just looks worse than it really is because of the color and contrast choices they used. I'll wait until the production hits the streets before judging it as a whole.

That is one piss poor sewing job. My grandma can do better. What lazy quality from the assembly line.

 

 

I am willing to bet that sewing job was not performed on an assembly line.

. And you think it makes it okay given that this was the car they chose to show the automotive world?

 

Pre-production cars are just that... pre-production.  There is a possibility of changes to the assembly process or the assembly process not even been fully developed yet.

 

ALL manufacturers have pre-production cars that they use to show the public and press.....and all of them have flaws in assembly.   I will never judge a car show debut car on assembly quality, ever.   

 

Sometimes the manufacturer let the Press drive these pre-production cars. Often times, they won't even have a VIN because they are due to be crushed after a certain time. The manufacturer will put a disclaimer sticker in the car somewhere indicating that it is pre-production... and yes.. there will be flaws.

 

Once the actual production Continentals start rolling out, then we can have a looksee to judge.

I understand that but I've seen a lot of preproduction cars and I think what makes this error obvious is the contrast from the stitching to the door panel color. Just looks way too obvious and it would bug me to no end. I would certainly hope this does not happen to a production model.

That is one piss poor sewing job. My grandma can do better. What lazy quality from the assembly line.

 

 

I am willing to bet that sewing job was not performed on an assembly line.

35k for 197hp.. Bargain of the year right there. Probably less tq too as it's a n/a 4cyl. 

 

I guess I'm finding it harder and harder to make a case to buy this thing.

 

Upon initial release I was pretty excited as a smaller premium CUV is kind of up my ally for a next vehicle but at 40k it is still a sub 200hp vehicle and I won't drive a vehicle that size with less than 200hp and 200tq. I'm just not finding anything that makes me want it over the competition.

I doubt though that anyone is cross shopping a Buick with a Jaguar, with a few exceptions of course. This is aimed at Acura, Lexus, and Lincoln.

You are absolutely correct. But does that make the Buick overpriced or the Jag a bargain ? (excluding their reliability because we agree that is an issue - out of warranty)[/quote

I won't get into all that because I think most cars are overpriced these days. I agree that the motor is small for that price but most non-enthusiast buyers don't care and probably won't even notice such things as long as it does what they need it to do.

35k for 197hp.. Bargain of the year right there. Probably less tq too as it's a n/a 4cyl. 

 

I guess I'm finding it harder and harder to make a case to buy this thing.

 

Upon initial release I was pretty excited as a smaller premium CUV is kind of up my ally for a next vehicle but at 40k it is still a sub 200hp vehicle and I won't drive a vehicle that size with less than 200hp and 200tq. I'm just not finding anything that makes me want it over the competition.

I doubt though that anyone is cross shopping a Buick with a Jaguar, with a few exceptions of course. This is aimed at Acura, Lexus, and Lincoln.

That's the thing. Jaguar has a very sparse dealer and parts network compared to Buick. Listen. I have always loved the look of most Jaguars but they are nightmares after the warranty runs out (and sometimes before it runs out), which is still a big deal for most folks. They are just piles of dung to me and I have seen nothing from them over the years that will change my opinion of them.

I would still rather walk around 1 style of work van(Sprinter) than Sparks, Sonics, Cruzes, Trax, City Express, and Express, or any Chevy when shopping for my 60-100k car.

 

Yes, some MB dealers sell work vehicles on their luxury lot but I don't see that as much of an issue as Cadillac selling on the same lot as a whole Chevrolet brand with the bowtie equally large and bold on the building as the Cadillac shield. 

 

While all of us here know damn well that a CTS and ATS are built on a completely different platform(and are very, VERY good vehicles) I bet just being on the same lot gives a lot of ignorant people the idea that a CTS is a dressed up Impala and a dressed up either Cruze or Malibu. Even though the proportions aren't the same AT ALL. There are just A LOT of people who aren't car people that have no clue about any of the stuff we talk about here. I even have "car guys" that I talk to that don't really know that much about the brand new tech that GM/Ford have like the 9 and 10 spd transmissions, for example. or the small turbo engines that both the Fusion and Malibu have. Or that the engine in my Escape is essentially the same engine in the Focus ST slightly detuned(252hp to 240hp - both 270tq)

It is far more common these days for MB to sell this vans like that (alongside the S Class) than it is for GM to share those two lots (Caddy and Chevy), of which they have reduced over the years btw. Not one Cadillac dealership in the Phoenix valley area shares any space with any other GM make.

 

Sprinter vans apparently have the steering feel of a sports sedans according to car and driver.

I can speak from experience, that Sprinter vans have nothing of the sort of feel you state. Car and Driver needs to get some real drivers as the Sprinters have the same numb feel in handling as any other van out there.

 

I'll second that. Having driven both a Sprinter van and a Ford Transit van, I can honestly say that I would take the Ford all day, every day. Car and Driver is smoking crack regarding that "steering feel" btw.

After pricing out a new Jaguar F Pace on line for like 45k, I scratch my head to figure who is gonna pony up for this, especially with its already past due styling, and Chinese build.

The people who don't have Jag dealers near them...

Not the mention the people who don't want Jaguar maintenance after the warranty runs out.

That was number 2 on the reasons I wouldn't want a Jag but if I was buying brand new I wouldn't be overly concerned about that part. That's more what I, personally, would worry about as I'm more of a 2nd hand car purchaser where I probably won't have much, if any, warranty remaining.

right now i think you get a 6 yr warranty on Jags.  I'll check that.

 

I'd choose a Jag before a Chinese vehicle at 45-50k.  I'd have a lot more trust in that.

 

45k for 340 +/- hp supercharged v6, big ass moonroof, etc.  sure it may not be real leather at that price? but often GM's leather feels more like vinyl anyways.  This is a serious machine, not a next gen downsized Equinox

 

http://rules.config.jaguar.com/jdx/en_us_seatoff/f-pace_k17/3c3m9/a-30p-340aawd_a-crossover_jt0/b51d_jt1b-1_ner_z88d/jaguar.pdf

Yeah I just built a Jag F-Pace for $50,520 and the only thing I didn't add because it was 2k was the bi-xenon headlights but it came with parking sensors and crap I didn't really want and I didn't think 2k was worth it.  

 

6 years but how many miles? 

 

FYI This is how mine turned out. http://rules.config.jaguar.com/jdx/en_us_seatoff/f-pace_k17/3c3m9/a-30p-340aawd_a-crossover_jt1/b16d-f45c_c55r_f96j_h01ejet_hgy_jt1b-1_z93l1/jaguar.pdf

It five years just like almost everyone else. Still would not have one.

 

But the point it is Mercedes has a history with building commercial vehicles for fleet customers.

That's NOT the point. 

In THIS market (the U.S.- 2nd in importance to Daimler after China), there has been a very specific image of 'luxury vehicle' for the MB badge.

Cadillac is frequently addressed as 'lacking focus' when it is mercedes benz that has products shooting in all sorts of different directions, more and more recently which don't come close to the 'the best or nothing' tagline.

 

MB Storefronts are not so pathethic to have an E-Class or GLS SUV right across a Sprinter van.

Oh they absolutely do. Right up the road from me the MB dealer loves to have anywhere from 6-14 Sprinters on the front row- looks like a Hertz lot.

 

I will baldy take a picture of the local MB dealership near me in Phoenix that proudly displays their vans out in the form of their lots at times right next to their C and E Class companions. 

They are that "pathetic" Suave. 

Notice the Vans on the left side of the lot (can't miss them).

Occasionally they put a silver van at the prominent corner in front of the dealership. 

Yes pathetic indeed.

 

It's impossible to compare them like that. Mercedes is managing its brand. Cadillac still can't figure out that having more of better leather and details in an interior is all they are away from an outright win the the large luxury sedan segment.

 

You can't be objective about this statement. "mercedes benz that has products shooting in all sorts of different directions, more and more recently which don't come close to the 'the best or nothing' tagline."

 

The G-Class is a unicorn, it is the best at being what it is. Sprinter vans apparently have the steering feel of a sports sedans according to caranadriver.

 

I'm precisely trying to say do not compare the two brands as two equals.

 

And GM is going for 90% coverage of luxury segment. They're utterly chasing for sales volumes.

Daimler's 'managing of it's (MB) brand' is to poke into every segment out there, in nothing other than a high speed pursuit of volume.

 

Cadillac is NOT chasing volume. 'GM' of course is chasing volume, but 'Cadillac' is not 'GM'.

Frankly, some of the upcoming Cadillac expansion I am NOT welcoming warmly, as it represents exactly my criticism of mercedes.

 

RE 'brands as equals', they are not on numerous levels, but both are primarily associated with luxury products (well, a number of mercedes' are not), and therefore comparisons can , have and will be made. But I can still leave Cadillac out of it other than to set a context of subjective commentary.

 

This and I might add that the main person constantly trying to compare everything Cadillac with everything Mercedes Benz is a Mercedes fanboy. Perhaps Suave should direct it at him since he does this at every turn and on every thread by interjecting Mercedes into every damn topic.

 

I wonder if Chrysler has any new vehicles in development after the Pacifica, Compass, and Wrangler, maybe the Grand Wagoneer.  People on allpar talk about Giulia based 300, Challenger, and Charger in 2019 as well as new Dodge and Chrysler crossovers, but I wonder if that is just vaporware. 

They have lots of new products in the works.  Hellcat Grand Cherokee, Hellcat Durango, Hellcat Wrangler, Hellcat Pacifica, Hellcat Dodge Dart, Hellcat Fiat 500, etc.  All you have to do is put a monster V8 in a super dated and otherwise lackluster product and jack the price up and watch the sales roll in.  Every other car company that has models on 6-7 year cycles has got it wrong.  You want vehicles on Crown Vic style 17 year life cycles, throw in some body kits or new engine every 7 years as a "special edition"  this is the way to make it in the auto industry.  

 

So the Hellcat lineup is the AMG of Fiat/Chrysler/Doge/Jeep? Just slap the label on any old car and call it day and the suckers will gladly overpay for it? Sounds right to me.

 

 

A Lexus NX or Lincoln MKC is cheaper and a much better deal than the Envision.  And the Lexus NX is a Lexus, it has a real luxury badge on it.  And if people are shopping reliability, sadly Lexus is the best in that regard.   $45k for an Envision Premium 2?  You can get a Lexus RX for that money, and have a larger, roomier vehicle, with a V6, etc.

. There you go again. Let me tell you something about the Lexus NX. It is a Fancy Toyota RAV4. Funny how you don't say anything about that but when it involves Cadillac, it is somehow a different story.

 

We are talking about a Chinese built Buick SUV that has already been on market a few years and looks dated at launch, and they want Lexus money for it.  Yes the Lexus NX is a Rav4 underneath, but it is still a Lexus, which is better than any Buick, and a much more respected badge.  

 

I was comparing the Envision to NX and MKC because they are based on the Rav4 and Escape, and turbo 4, front drive crossovers.  Both the Lincoln and Lexus are nicer and I think look better and have a better brand image.  Would be unfair to compare those 2nd tier crossovers to the rear drive Germans.

 

You keep telling yourself that. You'd be wrong but keep telling yourself that, especially when stating things like Lincoln having a better brand image here when you have completely dogged them out in every other way on every other thread about Lincoln. BTW, Buick has beaten Lexus in several comparos (see LaCrosse vs. ES350 for one example) so your "Lexus better than any Buick" remark is, as usual, pure hot air.