surreal1272

Yes people know CTS now because they spent 15 years advertising it. So they throw that away and spend 10-15 years advertising CT4 and then they'll throw that away and start over again. GLK to GLC isn't that bad of a change, when there is already a similar looking C-class. And they changed SLK to SLC even though it has nothing to do with the C-class chassis. GLC sales up 84% in February and 97% in March. GLC is on fire! Same problem for both companies but of course you only see it as a problem for one company. Typical.

A quote from this piece. I'm sorry what?! NO NO NO NO I do think Peter does make some good points once in awhile. But they are buried in a mess of other words. To put it simply. Exactly because then the trolls would be screaming "the FWD Escalade S deludes the Esclalade brand because of FWD der de der!" Thanks for the down vote. That's how I know I was telling the truth.

A quote from this piece. I'm sorry what?! NO NO NO NO I do think Peter does make some good points once in awhile. But they are buried in a mess of other words. To put it simply. Exactly because then the trolls would be screaming "the FWD Escalade S deludes the Esclalade brand because of FWD der de der!"

My thoughts exactly. His bias was plain as day as well.

Again you contradict yourself. You say here to wait a full year but had no problem emphasizing the S Class for December 2015. Do you see the problem or are you going to continue on and act like none of that ever happened?

Grab a history book. There you will see why Cadillac changed the naming scheme and it's mainly because all of those old names were drug into the ground by half ass efforts and horrible execution to the point that everyone forgot about them. The name change was a good thing when you take those silly little Daimler blinders off and understand those basic facts.

Nevermind.

Think it all you want but dealerships do and will always matter to non blind customers. The rest of your post doesn't even merit a response because I'm no longer taking part in your bar moving. Of course, because MB follows revenue above all else! March 2016 ~ cla-class : DOWN 28% c-class : DOWN 13% e-class : DOWN 19% s-class : DOWN 36% VANS :: UP 29% Expect to see increasing emphasis / dealer stock on from the etherial "van division" of Daimler in the coming year as the rest of the brand is entering a sales 'slide'. Do not forget the rebadged Nissan Truck that will show up along side the vans for sales sA one month snap shot, E-class is on a model change over, C-class adding 2 body styles this year. They'll stabilize, but sedan sales are dropping, crossovers are rising. The overall luxury sedan market was down like 15% last year. And? You sure had no problem pointing out the one month snap shot of S Class sales back in December. Again, moving the damn bar.

For $h!s sake bar mover. They don't need name changes. They need more variants and CUVs, of which you agree with not even three damn days ago. Pick a stance and stick with it.

Well considering how much better a well appointed Cruze interior looks compared to a $30K CLA, that should worry you a lot. Go ahead and debate that but those two pictures posted are worth a thousand words.

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.

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.

Really?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.

Craptors? What cha talking about Willis? The Toronto Raptors after they came back on Indiana last night.

Nevermind.

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.

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.

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.

Why would anyone possibly down vote that? Sorry, I know that's off the subject. Carry on.

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.

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.

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? 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.

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.

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?