balthazar

'Squashing facts'?? You're 'surmising' CTS buyers are jumping 50% in price from Regals & GPs and I'm squashing facts?? Let's see your trade-in break-downs. Simply repeating conjecture 'not a lot of conquest sales' with zero fact behind it is that very same thing you are accusing me of doing. What are mercedes' conquest sales in the last 5 years? How does that validate or refute mercedes' 'success' in the last 5 years? Why does mercedes need 28 models to compete in volume and why did sales drop last year? Cadillac doesn't even have a $20-someK hatchback and a minivan to pull down their ABA. You want to stick a sharpened stick in a segment underperformer, it's mercedes you're looking for. >>"I would never expect any luxury marque to have a 'youthful' ABA, since not many 'youth' have the cash necessary."<< No kidding. Then why bother with: >>"The 30-50 yr old crowd that are shopping BMW, Infiniti, Audi, Lexus and Mercedes do not have Cadillac on their radar."<< when more 30-50 yr olds are shopping Cadillac than mercedes? The implication is Cadillacs are for old folks but the reality is quite different. >>"the problem is that the CTS is a strong product for a GM fan to buy, but not for a 3, G35, A4, etc buyer to buy."<< Again, what makes you think the 3, 35, 4 are on the radar screens of the 60K annual CTS buyers, and what makes that an entirely different scenario? Oh, I get it: those imports are so amazingly better that a Cadillac is far beneath their upturned noses, while every single CTS owner is a faint breeze from jumping in any one of those and he 'settled' for a CTS (after all, it's so much better than the $20K Regal he came out of). Classic old school perceptions.

Mercedes has a far older ABA than Cadillac. Cadillac's ABA is dropping, mercedes' is rising (their positions on the scale were reversed about 5 years ago.Average Buyer Age~ Mercedes -- 58.7 Cadillac -- 53.4 Jaguar -- 49.8 Lexus -- 49.4 BMW -- 46.1 Infiniti -- 41.6 Really, only infiniti has a relatively enviable ABA- even BMW's is only the median age of all car buyers; certainly not what would be termed 'youthful'. Any "open-minded luxury buyer" that would not consider Cadillac is in no way "open-minded". So the question remains- just who are all these new Cadillac customers pushing sales up year after year, and what did they trade in from other brands?? What was the problem again?

I'd prefer a really cool, archives-sourced, never-seen-before, chronological history of the complete developmental & racing history of the Daytona/Superbird, rather than this.

I have about 4500 print ads back to the 'teens, hundreds of magazines & clipped pages/pictures, books, brochures.... maybe 25K pieces.

'Remember'?? With a few million on the road, I doubt remembrances are neccessary.I didn't care for the look initially, but it's not haphazard, convoluted & bloated like toyota's body undulations & tacked on bling-supreme grille.

97regalGS= >>"In the 80's and 90's they were.....?"<< I've not studied the era, but in the '90s, it seems to me the Seville & Allante were compeitive with in their segment- the Deville was in a class by itself, no? It's really not my era. >>"Cadillac's best work was not 47 years ago, it was, (according to balthazar, sometime in the 70's) at least 26+ years ago. That's a HUGE difference. NOT."<< Look, maybe you don't care if metric tons of mud is slung around-- dford implied the entire showcase of Cadillacs was terrible (he certainly didn't call out 1 year out of 13) and they all would turn off potential consumers. Obviously you agree with that. Both opinions are not grounded in reality. I'm here to correct that. If you insist on whitewashing everything, fine; the conversation is over. But I will not sit by and watch gross misstatements carelessly tossed about. You do realize that mercedes & BMW were woefully uncompetitive in the '50s, '60s and '70s, right? Who was class leading longer? The '80s and '90s have no more bearing on potential new customers than the '40s and '50s, but let's focus on the singular '85 and call it all a failure. Excellent work.

You can get some powdercoat colors in a translucent- tho I see no burgandies on my chart (Eastwood). No offense intended, but unless money is not a concern or you are building a show circuit Caprice, it seems that extra $ could be put to better use elsewhere on the car. Then again- I have no idea what the 2 processes would cost relative to each other.

Smells like a BMW 5-series from here.

>>"but it's best work until 2002 was back in 1959!! "<< Any '60s Cadillac trounces any '60 luxury import, and any '70s Cadillac is more than competitive overall with any '70s luxury import. You do not need to go back to the '50s to find Cadillac's best work. Your point is simply not factually valid. >>"And win a few comparision tests in those biased buff magazines so the car guys have to rethink their positions...... "<< This is an entirely different obstacle to overcome- magazines are not based on objective evaluations, but pushing pulp. It's "entertainment", not journalism.

Aluminum headers?? I would think adonizing everything would be cost-prohibitive, since it is not a simple, local process. Powdercoating would be far more budget-friendly and comparitively durable.

>>"Who cares if the 85 Seville was supposed to get conquest sales. "<< YOU were the one who stated it would do nothing to earn conquest sales. I stated it's appearance was not designed to attempt that. >>"TODAYS cadillacs are supposed to - because previous generations of Cadillacs lost the customer."<< Sure, but TODAYS Cadillacs have steadily regained consumers. >>"Many import luxury buyers have a negative perception of Cadillac."<< And many Cadillac buyers have a negative perception of import luxury cars. This is only natural. Any corporation who has a goal of appealing to every segment consumer risks driving that corporation into the ground. Fact is, there will ALWAYS be import loyalists that will NEVER consider Cadillac, and vice versa. >>"...the perception of Cadillac to most luxury consumers (that don't live in Detroit) is of poor quality and out dated technology"<< Source, please. >>...should not be running ads that remind potential new customers of cars those very customers perceive negatively."<< Source, please. >>"You are not going to change the perception of a car by flashing its image and playing some Iggy Pop in the backround. But you can change the perception of a brand by showing the current cars in a contemporary context - that the cars are relevant to todays luxury buyers."<< Cadillac has done relevent advertising countless times in recent years- have you missed them all?? How does one heritage-based ad counter all that? Do you believe Cadillac's recent considerable sales gains are now at risk? Did mercedes see a notable sales dip because they ran more than 1 heritage-based ad a few years back? Do not forget- no degree of clever, relevent advertising is going to translate into lasting sales unless the product is there. Aren't Cadillac sales up something like the last 6 years in a row? This ad -tho not as effective as Moments, is a nice look back at the marque throughout it's history, the vast majority of which entailed class leading innovation & quality. Nothing wrong whatsoever with reinforcing that reality.

IMO, you are incorrect. #1- the 2nd gen Seville is not supposed to gain conquest sales from the competition's loyalists- just like an ad with an '85 BMW is not going to gain any conquests from any other brands loyalists today. It's not a compare-n-contrast ad, it's a look back at the marque's heritage. And the 2nd gen Seville was not without it's imitators (Imperial, Continental). I take it then the '85 is the only car you object to out of like 13? Hardly seems to warrant "the terrible cars". #2: 2006-30=1976. Cadillac was setting sales records (still not even approached today) in this era and the Seville was a critical and sales success. mercedes & BMW were still enlarging, equipping & empowering their cars to compete with Cadillac in the late '70s; Cadillac was the segment benchmark whether you believe it or not. '30 years of nothing' is a gross overstatement. And sometimes a little heritage awarness can educate those with erroneous perceptions.....

Wow, dford- what planet are you logging in from?? Did you watch the linked ads at all? It showed -what- 13 models over the course of Cadillac's history: which ones weren't "terrible" in your opinion?

My grandfather bought a new CTS last year, when he was 90.

Oldest of 3, same parents. I work daily with the youngest (brother), get along very well with him and middle sister. Age spread from me to him is about 7 years.

I'd sure love to see a media whistleblower come forth so some house cleaning can get done. After all, if it was worth declaring that pro wrestling is 'entertainment' when everyone knew that all along, why do auto magazines get a 'bye' when actual economic influence in involved?

Doesn't every phone sold come with a clip? Or do some people hold them in their sweaty little hand all day?

I would prefer this focus of marketing go unannounced rather than a press release be issued. It serves no purpose to say 'I'm going to do this'; just f'ing do it, damnit.

An increasing degree of divisional exclusivity MUST be so & prominently, esp from an engineering standpoint. Budget undoubtedly will not allow each division unique hardware, but the overlap & interchangability must continue to decline. Cadillac is in good standing, but Buick needs to pull out of the pack, and yesterday. One can trace the general historical Corporate decline clearly back to the elimination of divisional engineering- it's high time that short-sighted decision was reversed (again: as much as the budget will allow).

'retro fenders': '54 Wildcat II with open front wheelwells. 'floating hubcaps' : '53 Wildcat I with RotoStat front wheels. 'mid-engine 3.8' : '85 Wildcat lift-canopy mid-engined exotic.

Since the suggestions for self-betterment are flying in here, here's another thing to watch; the "we all" mentality. No such thing. Everyone here speaks for themselves only; no one's been elected anyone else's representative.

Almost gone:

And the '58-59 Edsel Corsair.

Chance-Vought Corsair.

V-16, naturally. I should clarify- it's 'World's Fair' significance was that it was especially built as a show car- no production '33s had that same sloping rear deck. It's the first custom showcar built by Cadillac.