Suaviloquent

Actually I can tell almost exactly how it will drive. It'll drive like a sharper version of a new Lincoln MKX. It'll probably be faster than it by an appreciable amount. The AWD system will help powering through corners. Generally the auto press that has driven the new MKX have said quite simply that it is be the best crossover for those who want a pillowy soft ride, but atleast content driving dynamics - much better than any competing Lexus or Acura. The XTS does that, but unlike the Lincoln, it had a pretty harsh ride with the large wheel options and Magnetic ride control. The MKX on the other hand, even with the large wheel option on a loaded model handled Detroit's bombed roads just fine. And yes. The vehicle will deliver exactly to the customer that Lincoln says it will. I mean they are pretty forthcoming, if you want a sports sedan, this ain't it. And most likely it'll have some inspired driving. It may even upset a Lexus LS. There's a whole lot of nonsense going around that the driving dynamics of this vehicle will be incompetent, and its just ridiculous stupidity. If there's any company that knows how tune a steering rack right on a FWD based car that has a a good amount of power it's Ford Mo Co. You can look at all the Ford Performance branded cars as proof of it. The agility of the MKX - for its intended purpose, surprised almost every journalist. It's a fact.

I don't buy it. Of course GM is doing much better now in terms of retail sales - but again. When their showroom ages - because GM has already said they'll slow down the pace of clean-sheet redesigns... Fleet sales will go up to keep the lights going. It's a fact. It's how they've operated. All of the domestic brands. I've read car mags for like 10 years in a row now. And every time some automakers says "We're going to chase retail!" It ends up being a short-term campaign, once the models start becoming older they start selling to fleets more. I expect nothing to change in this dynamic. Numbers may, but the whole system won't.

It's well known that the Continental has a great interior, and recent Lincoln features like the seats and the audio systems are placed at or above top-end Mercedes features. Add to that the trick AWD system that many in the industry recognize as one of the best, it's hard not imagine this car not doing quite well. And in China i'ts going to sell. Really, really, well. I'm not kidding. You don't have to like the car. But to pretend that this vehicle isn't delivering exactly what they say it does - namely top-end creature comforts,,, I can't help anyone not recognize that.

Sure. I'm not playing this announcement up at all. In the Tesla thread I mentioned how paid deposits are much better indicators of purchase intention than this. But yeah, in terms of paper stats, I was expecting this vehicle to be a total fail. But on paper and in person, it's a lot more favourable than I thought. And it's competition in terms of core product is the Volvo S90. I think the Volvo has a better interior, but more in terms of styling, not materials. We know for a fact that the Lincoln, surprisingly, will have a newer AWD system. We know that weights will be similar, because the Volvo Scalable Product Architecture is kinda heavy. Based on how newer Fords and Lincoln have very pleasing road manners, it's not hard to imagine a more isolated, cocooned luxo-barge won't deliver on passenger comfort. I'll continue to say this. This car has created a brand awareness of Lincoln that is missing. Most likely someone will go to a Lincoln dealer without ever doing so ever before. I like this car. If I could swing the coin, I'd buy both this and the CT6. But if I could only pick one, I would test drive both. I'm not much of a hardened driver, looking to push the limit of the machine. I drive just 5 mph over the speed limit, and usually in the collector lanes. I like relaxed demeanor cars. And I like truly like the styling of the Lincoln far more than the LWB CTS.... So there you have it.

They don't really have a credible go to market plan. I think this would work much better of PSA and Fiat had an agreement - perhaps to have the those cars re-badged as Dodges and Chryslers. And even that is a pretty dumb strategy - as those same FCA products aren't doing so swell. So if they bring small compact cars - the Japanese and Korean brands have much higher perceived value there. There's not much here for PSA. Why are they doing this?!

Just to be clear - I find all this back forth between Foarder this and General Moron this really stupid and petty. All this stupid nonsensical analysis of stupidity. This kind of thread is always predictable. Sheesh. Now someone's gonna say, but they started it first!! Trump did that recently and he was told by the top CNN anchor that it's the explanation of a 5 year-old. Plumbuses are what we really need.

Maximum douche all the things!

Uh, I'm not saying it's going to get 40,000 sales. I think it'll do what Lincoln intends of it. It's going to do really well in China. I like it a lot, and I was the among the many who thought it was more of the same. But priorities are shifting. Drew already thinks in terms of style this is above the G90. I'm not alone among the many actually that like this vehicle. And they've been quick to say it's not going up against some Mercedes S-Class AMG or Cadillac CT6-V. They've been quite blunt about what the vehicle is, and and I'm very sure that some aspects are going to be very class-competitive. Such as the interior, the bespoke audio system and trick AWD system that can mimic RWD handling dynamics, such as using true torque vectoring to power outside corner wheels in a turn.

So you think the rest of the industry isn't doing that concurrently? Is that the argument? Well let me tell you, Mercedes is making more AMG models to raise the entry price of what would have been an E450 equivalent. BMW is also going to produce ultra-luxury variants of this X7 and 7 Series. Every luxury automaker is focused on higher margins per sale. Every one of them!! Don't be dogmatic. We all know why Cadillac ATPs appear to be higher - they're not going to sell vehicles that Buick sells really well. But I'd also like them so sell a million vehicles around the globe. But I also recongize that they shouldn't be dealing with petty sales from the rest. But the way they're building themselves up - they're inadvertently just competing against the brands it wants to distance itself from. The reasons why Mercedes and BMW make lower end models is that they don't have a large stable of mass-market brands to support them. They don't. And they've been making entry level models for a long time. I have always been saying that they should be building the El Miraj, the top notch, profit per vehicle driver you just mentioned. But whoop de do, the new Cadillac has to deliver just that, but even more ostentatious, because the launch window sailed by.

As long as it's not populism.

Well, it's a softer sedan, and softer sedans are doing much better than their hard-edged versions in the market. I think it'll do as they expect, and any sales here will be a bonus. I would make the 2.7 the standard engine however. The 3.7 is really long in the tooth.

You're comparing a FWD Toad to a RWD sedan. The Tesla should BE commanding $10,000 premium in its base model. You know we have quite a few posters here who scream RWD! Value! Excellence at that price! And the Bolt is not excellence. It's just the first good compliance car. And the federal incentives ARE marginal. Which means its gets cut in half first. And defending the Bolt because it'll be a poor seller to customers - retail customers at that is a terrible excuse. Suddenly it's great it'll be a blip on the radar. I want electric cars to come off the tax credit teet. Tesla being the first automaker to do so already gets my respect because they take this new trend seriously. What does it say about GM if they have to through the kicthen sink into the Bolt, and it still isn't desirable? It's a wasted effort, because they have confused customers. Here's a Volt that's the best solution against range deficient EV. Now let's build an EV that's not range deficient! Wonderful - the rest of the competing EVs will no longer be range deficient!

I think GM moving out of the rental business right now has nothing to do with actually reducing fleet sales. They're revamping their model lineup as we speak and it means the fleet allocations have been deferred. For example, the majority of Cruzes available are the limited model and the Cruze took a massive hit in sales when they reduced the fleet allocation that and the incoming 2017 Cruze. Ford did exactly the same in 2011 and 2012. http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2012/03/31/are-fords-sales-gains-better-than-they-look.aspx Either way, it's short-term tactic to ensure adequate inventories for the new models. This time next year, GM will UP fleet sales when the production has smoothed out. I hate to look at short-term trends, while GM and Ford have historically always been fleet heavy of some kind, whether government, commercial or rental.

Eh, I'm lazy. Anything compliant. Five of them please. And I'd like the works - and please use that Mighty Angus sauce sparingly.

The Model X is a far more complicated car to build. And their production rate is constrained by their supplier's ability to provide doors for it. The Model X is an ill-advised reference for the 3 - which doesn't have hatch bodystyle or even the motorized door handles of the S. You know a start-up in such an industry is expected to miss dates. But when mismanaged companies all over the industry push deadlines it's not as catchy a headline is it?

Easy. Tesla or Cadillac. or both, used.

The thing is the Tesla Model 3 isn't just existing in a vaccum. It's taking away sales leads from other makes. Seriously. Like here's an article that says Lincoln has 40,000 interested people in the Continental. That's not the same as getting $1,000 cash from everyone of them because they want to place a mark on the line so they can get the vehicle first. It just isn't the same. And a small Tesla sedan faster than the Corvette is a problem. Not for GM. But just in terms of absolutes. It's just disruptive. And that's what it's all about. Disrupt and cripple the ability of the competition, well, to compete.

Okay so the best argument for Cadillac's revival is that we can speculate on what they will do in the future. Not a good one. But I'll indulge. Honestly, I just need to see this kind of proof: Cadillac rightfully snatching dominance back in its home market. That's all we need to see. I don't care how they do it. But how they're doing it is chasing after the same formulas that are now crumbling. Competing sedan sales are now sliding, just like the CTS has suffered since redesign. And it doesn't need to involve going toe-to-toe to Germans in every niche segment. I would recommend Cadillac realign its sedan strategy. I would keep the XTS - doing the bare minimum required - to keep competitors like the Lincoln Continental stifled. I would have held on to the CT6 one year more to finish what they started - fix the interior. I would refuse to have a 2.0T engine in the U.S, arguably because the 3.6 is just as efficient, because it waters down the image building the CT6 represents. That low-ball price point is the exact example I mention of how counter-intuitive it is to build up the transaction price. It's largely because no one will buy it. So why offer it? Are they that desperate to put the starting at $54,000 at the butt of a commercial or advertisement? And then show in fine print as spec'd its closer to $80k?! I would invest heavily in crossovers - and offering an ultra-luxury range on every one of them. And leave the crossover coupe shenanigans to the German makes. It's better to have the core segments covered, and keep the customers that Cadillac had relied one first - the kind that like softer vehicles. I think an XT3 easily trump something like the Lincoln MKC or Lexus NX. But here's the trouble: the Camaro is already a better coupe than the ATS coupe. You don't want a resurgent Buick to Envision to compete against the Cadillac, but I think GM has done very well with differentiation. The way the Lacrosse and XTS were handled are proof of it. And they're not exactly inspired vehicles dynamically, but they And finally, I would build a proper halo car that would be loss leader in spite of it even having lukewarm reception. The Escalade would keep getting more utlra-luxury variants. Sedans would get choice replacement based on real needs. I would suggest Cadillac find a way to keep the length of vehicles in check for segmentation reasons. The CTS looks great, and dynamic, but it's the longest car in its class and has one of the smaller backseats, which I get it, enthusiasts don't care. They're a shrinking demographic, and if they are smart they'd go even one step further and buy say a Camaro or put money down for the Tesla over the ubiquitous 3 series. I think the ATS program didn't do nearly as well, because the previous customers actually liked the tweener car. Of course, the next ATS should be the CTS was originally in purpose. Make Cadillac different by present itself as a different standard. Because here's how Cadillac differentiates really well. They know how to make a car satisfying to drive, and especially one that is bigger than the nearest competitor. Capitalize on that to win. Honestly, I think the CT6 comes off really as a LWB CTS in its lower trims - a boon for people who would like how the CTS drives. The interior is that reduced in finishing department though. So the next CT4+ should be more aligned as a RWB and LWB. The CT6 sold as a LWB makes more sense. Especially with people already calling it an extended CTS. That way, you lift up the interior of the CTS slightly more as well.

Which if it's what customers want - I mean these AMG models are no slouches - they will get the same performance of AMG models perhaps 2-3 generations ago - but with a similar price point and much improved technologies. It's a different strategy. It's one thing to not like it. It's another thing to pretend that's it's inferior to whatever standard someone wants to bring out as reference. Because as of now Mercedes is pulling ahead of everyone. I'm not saying I like Mercedes, I don't like their CLA or GLA. But I don't see any underlying issue with this. AMG models are still a very low fraction of their sales. And the E550 was gone because of compliance reasons. Unfortunate, and of course certainly not the mid-level V8 we want. But then again, that's what everyone is doing. Now the mid level engine is a boosted six of some kind. That's the way it is.

They're probably going to make another equity offering now. The share price has rebounded. Their brand value is currently off the charts. If they announce a year from now the model Y, a crossover - you know for like $45,000.... What are they going to get, like 500,000 orders in the span of a week? It's a movement, it's a phenomenon, it's something no one has seen before.

It's an interesting car. And they got a lot of commotion going on for it, and the styling - especially the interior looks the part. I think against the S90, it stacks up quite nice. The CT6 base model has its interior stripped quite a bit to get at that price. The S90 being based on the XC90, it's no featherweight. The base model of that car is projected to be like 4300 lbs. I think offering the 2.7 for like $47,500 - like the base model S90, would be an interesting comparison.

You know the same customer was previously served by an AMG Sport package on say like a E550. It's just a trim reorganization. And you get multiple replication of the same underlying car. In reality AMG has maybe 10 distinct models. And then you have the variants. Sheesh, I think people would understand body styles of the same car on the same platform are treated as the same model.

In terms of absolutes then why are all of these new Cadillac products penetration priced? Every competitor to Cadillac is usually higher priced for less content or have ultra-luxury variants. I'm just saying I don't give credence to what Cadillac PR has to say. Because their ATPs are padded by Escalade sales - which have plateaued in the US, and when the sub ATS model and XT3 are released their ATPs will go down. Every luxury automaker is focused on profits. You don't think the loaded CLAs' being sold aren't lucrative? Profit per unit - uhhh lets see Porsche banks $20,000 for every car at the least.

No one has sidelined the issue. Of course production is going to be one hell of a bitch. But Tesla is too valuable of a brand now. It's not too big to fail yet. But it's too valuable to lose. And quite frankly - what they have done is crush the credibility of the incumbents to deliver the kinds of products that can compete against this. And to answer your question Balth, Tesla will deliver 80 to 90k vehicles this year. With split of about 60/40 S/X. They will fulfill all of the pre-orders this year. Delays are unfortunate. And it is an uphill battle. But unlike the companies that do nothing but follow - I want Tesla to succeed because they try harder.

Different customers have different needs, and different companies - even close competitors will have different market strategies. Comparing the two companies here always boiled down to personal brand preference. And no amount of objective rationalization of brand performance cherry-picked to represent some kind of moral victory will get around that. Now was that so hard to digest? Am I not articulating the heart of the stupid arguments I'm reading from both sides?