Just curious as to how others feel about the current offering of Automobile Commercials on TV. It seems to me that all the manufacturers are going more for image then tauting the advantages of their products. I guess that their marketing agencies feel as though the current trend in making commercials is the way to go. I prefer the commercials of the past, when the advantages and improvements in the models were the order of the day. Here are a couple of samples of commercials of the past. I especially remember when Jack Lescoulie did the Buick Commericals. It was like he was delivering the Gettysburg Address. He really made you want to run right out and buy a Buick.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s4Khi7rtnbM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KMAddpU6EPA
I haven't seen many late and current car commercials for USA, but with the cost of advertising these days, what I have seen, even down here doesn't encourage me to buy a new car.
The old adverts really make one want to go and buy, but the modern ones but nowadays everything is "arty-farty", flashy and just too "over-the-top". The Directors are more about showing off how "smart" they can be, than to simply show us what they have to promote.
Even advertising down here is showing stuff that is using overseas-made advertising, with a small disclaimer that the shown model in not available here. The advertisers really don't think much of the people that they are trying to sell to.
Bruce. >:D
What amuses me most about car ads on TV is the cars shown never seem to be in traffic and there is always a parking space for them.
I think the one car advertisement I like is the Subaru as it tells you you can survive an accident in their car. That's paramount for someone to think about. The others advertise lame topics as I perceive its hard to tell one car from the others they all look alike.
As the Internet provides convenient access to so much detailed information including specs, images, videos, commentary, etc, there is less need to talk about specific improvements or advantages in commercial these days compared to times past when accessing information wasn't as quick and easy and lengthy 2-3 minute commercials were more necessary.
As far as the appeal of or preference for older commercials, I think for some it's simply that the commercials bring them back to their youth or younger years and the cars they admired back then.
Quote from: Tpicks55 on January 11, 2018, 09:17:22 AM
The others advertise lame topics as I perceive its hard to tell one car from the others they all look alike.
People have been commenting and complaining about cars looking alike for decades and decades, including back in the 1950s.
Quote from: Big Apple Caddy on January 11, 2018, 09:19:35 AM
As the Internet provides convenient access to so much detailed information including specs, images, videos, commentary, etc, there is less need to talk about specific improvements or advantages in commercial these days compared to times past when accessing information wasn't as quick and easy and lengthy 2-3 minute commercials were more necessary.
As far as the appeal of or preference for older commercials, I think for some it's simply that the commercials bring them back to their youth or younger years and the cars they admired back then.
Both interesting points.
Yes the Internet does provide more then enough information about an automobile or automobiles a prospective buyer would need. By using the Internet, a buyer can literally "build" the car of their choice and then be guided to a dealer who would have the car in inventory. Basically the car buying experience could be whittled down to a buyer going to show room. Actually see and sit in the vehicle of their choice, and then start the negotiating. Unlike in the past. When it was necessary to go to the showroom and start the whole process from scratch. But here is the thing. Putting aside brand loyalty for a moment. The manufacturers need a hook to get buyers in the showroom. This is where advertising comes in. The obvious purpose of commercials is to spark interest in a manufacturers product. They want to project a "must have" thinking for their product.
My preference for the older type of commercials, is because I want to know what a vehicle has to offer me. In other words, I prefer function over form.
Many current car commercials on TV show the car or cars being driven very aggressively and sliding sideways around corners. I want my vehicle to "stick to the road" and not slide around like on ice, so those commercials do not impress me. I know cars can be driven like they show, and may have tried it in my distant youth, but I'm afraid the modern commercials may encourage young drivers to try to emulate what they see, with undesirable results.
Bob Schuman
The commercials it seems are appealing to the youth culture - image - power - motion - action, and going places - fast (who wouldn't want that for a life style - and YOU THE DRIVER are the ambassador of the - look-at-me generation)
The commercial images are views from outside the car because, it shows what YOU could look like driving this car.
The exceptions are often quick shots of an electronic dash board - clean and a sign of the MODERN electronic age, of which YOU are a big part.
Frankly, those folks who grew up with our 3 sons and their friends have leased cars (new I might add) did not take a test drive. It was totally unnecessary as they knew what they wanted from what they saw driving the streets - only reinforced by the commercials selling their life style - or at least the one they wanted to project.
And after all, the short term lease has pushed aside buying, and if I don't like the car in a couple years - image changes and it will be time for new clothes = a NEW car.
Have fun,
Steve B
Actually, I have to laugh at the makers for showing their vehicles (SUV's and off-roaders) going through all manner of obstacles, when 99.9% of them will never leave the sealed surfaces.
Bruce. >:D
True DAT - Bruce.
Have fun,
Steve B
Just to add my $.02 worth to this conversation regarding cars looking "all alike". When I first met my wife (she is MUCH better now), she would see an older car, anything from the 30's to the 70's and tell me. within a year or two, what year the car was. I would ask her what make of car it was and she would not have a clue. So, the comment about all cars looking alike is and definitely was always a factor in automobiles.
Greg Surfas
As a kid of the 50s and 60s...
.....I could identify every make model and year from the post war period up through the 70s. And yes many of them did look alike. A Chrysler/Desoto/Dodge, even the Plymouth appeared to be very similar. Say the same for the GM and Ford cars. I cannot look at a 49 Cadillac Sedanette without seeing my brother-in-law's 49 Chevy Fleetline.. The independent auto manufacturers...Hudson, Studebaker, Nash, Kaiser/Fraizer, Packard, had distinct body styles from one another and were never confused.
When comparing the styles of the big three..... certainly Ford products didn't look like GM products and neither looked like Chrysler. But within each corporation there was a lot of inbreeding.
Having a such a smaller number of different automobiles back then, made identifying them easier. Imperial, Chrysler, Desoto, Dodge, Plymouth. Cadillac, Buick, Oldsmobile, Pontiac, Chevy. Lincoln, Mercury, Ford. Very, very, few foreign cars on American roads, until the Beetle caught on in the 60s. And that one looked like nothing else!!,
Now there are dozens of car companies and I do think they look alike. I can hardly tell a Mercedes from a Lexus, BMW, Honda or KIA. A few years ago no one would have mistaken an inexpensive KIA for a Mercedes. Mow...I guess wrong about 70% of the time,
Old cars rule.
Bob
Quote from: z3skybolt on January 12, 2018, 05:27:07 PM
As a kid of the 50s and 60s...
.....I could identify every make model and year from the post war period up through the 70s. And yes many of them did look alike. A Chrysler/Desoto/Dodge, even the Plymouth appeared to be very similar. Say the same for the GM and Ford cars. I cannot look at a 49 Cadillac Sedanette without seeing my brother-in-law's 49 Chevy Fleetline.. The independent auto manufacturers...Hudson, Studebaker, Nash, Kaiser/Fraizer, Packard, had distinct body styles from one another and were never confused.
When comparing the styles of the big three..... certainly Ford products didn't look like GM products and neither looked like Chrysler. But within each corporation there was a lot of inbreeding.
Having a such a smaller number of different automobiles back then, made identifying them easier. Imperial, Chrysler, Desoto, Dodge, Plymouth. Cadillac, Buick, Oldsmobile, Pontiac, Chevy. Lincoln, Mercury, Ford. Very, very, few foreign cars on American roads, until the Beetle caught on in the 60s. And that one looked like nothing else!!,
Now there are dozens of car companies and I do think they look alike. I can hardly tell a Mercedes from a Lexus, BMW, Honda or KIA. A few years ago no one would have mistaken an inexpensive KIA for a Mercedes. Mow...I guess wrong about 70% of the time,
Old cars rule.
Bob
Granted that most cars today, do resemble each other. This has been the order of the day for quite a few decades now. I might add that Cadillac has confused the situation even more, by doing away with names for their models and replacing with letters and number. I suppose to many younger buyers, say under 45, looks and style don't count for that much when deciding what car to buy. The adds don't include phrases like "bold new styling" etc. in their ads. As been stated before. It all appears to be about image.
Yes,
When my youngest son graduated from Law School he bought his first new car. A pain jane entry level Toyota. His older brother scoffed..."You aren't going to get any girls driving that thing". The youngster smirked...."I got a girlfriend...I just wanted reliable transportation."
Never could get that kid interested in cars.... even now. Five years later he still drives the Toyota, Which he paid for in one year. When he was 16 we offered to buy him a nice Jeep CJ. Nope dad...I just want mom's plain 7 year old Cherokee.
Not like his old man.
Bob
From what I notice more than ever before in the majority of car commercials I've seen in the last 5-10 years, is that the auto manufacturers all focus on MPG's, tech features, safety features/crash ratings and tout handling more than anything else.
Very rarely do you see a commercial these days that mention the vehicles "cool" styling, or any sort of reference to the design of the car, even in the luxury car commercials, you might see something related to it's performance, but never about its interesting lines, or quality of materials, nothing that actually has to do with the feel of the vehicle.
It's more about how you can get into a BMW 5 series with a great lease deal! Or how amazing the new Toyota Camry is because you now see young people jamming away or racing around on a race track. ???
Subaru and Volvo in all their commercials really focus their Ad's heavily on emotion, to get people to believe that if you buy a Subie, or a Volvo, somehow you're smarter and more intelligent than the person that just bought a Ford Fusion. It's honestly ridiculous marketing tactics that obviously works since the buying public is being sucked into believing this hype.
Women are mostly duped by this trick, it doesn't work as well on Men. However, Women buy more vehicles than Men and are easily manipulated by over the top emotionally charged advertising.
I'm not old, nor did I grow up in the 50's, 60's or 70's, but I have to agree with some here that I love and enjoy watching old vintage car commercials from the past on Youtube.
The days when car company commercials actually compared it's cars to it's competitors were awesome and very informative. Chrysler did this a lot with it's Imperials touting how much physically bigger a 65 Imperial is to a 65 Cadillac and Lincoln, how much more interior space it had etc....
We don't see these kinds of comparison anymore, nor do we see the kind of interesting and artful Ad's in magazines like you did years ago either.
I believe since modern cars look extremely similar to one another more than ever before, auto makers marketing departments aren't talking about how unique a Hyundai Sonata is compared to a Honda Accord, or a Chevy Malibu, or a Ford Fusion because generally, they all share the same body shapes, same proportions, and even drivetrains, that honestly, the difference between cars these days is price and interior design.
There's no mistaking an 85 Cadillac Brougham for an 85 Lincoln Town Car, the proportions are completely different as is the front grills and rear end treatment. The Lincoln being more boxy, upright, and square, while the Caddy , more angular, rounded off and long.
Speaking of newish cars, I just went to a car show here where I live at the convention center, and I was able to sit in just about every brand spanking new vehicle you could think of.
To my surprise and disappointment, new car interiors might look nice with all that fake stiching, but the actual materials are extremely cheap!! The Toyota Camry and Honda Accord being pretty bad, the door panels felt flimsy as did the center armrest and switches.
Cadillacs, like XT5 had a pretty good interior, but not what you expect for the price. Lexus, Audi, and Mercedes had the best quality interiors compared to everything on the showroom floor.
I test drove a few cars too, the new 2018 Chrysler 300 and Charger was very smooth riding, but it's interior was plain, and cheap feeling like all Dodge and Chrysler products. I was shocked in every sense of the way when I test drove a Mazda CX9 CUV. It had a beautiful striking interior that belonged in a luxury car, everything was padded and nicely textured. Its ride was really really smooth for a CUV and it looks stunning. A very futuristic CUV IMO with a great quality interior, high-end tech, a smooth ride and interior space that could house a football team!
Mazda is probably the only non-luxury automaker out there that is making luxury like interiors that is stylish and distinctive vs everyone else in its market including it's overall designs.
I still prefer the classic Cadillacs hands down to anything made today. Give me chrome galore, massive couch like seats, a big hood and trunk, Caddy Wreath n Crest on the hood, that cool n classy Cadillac styling, in a pillarless hardtop Deville with that smooth Caddy ride. 8) 8) :) Absolutely nothing at that car show could compare, not one to my 64.
Cadillac "Roll" Commercial
https://youtu.be/dWH16fb0Pys (https://youtu.be/dWH16fb0Pys)
Quote from: 64CaddieLacky on January 13, 2018, 06:18:04 AM
Mazda is probably the only non-luxury automaker out there that is making luxury like interiors that is stylish and distinctive vs everyone else in its market including it's overall designs.
Which begs the question. What qualifies a car to be a "luxury" car"? When in the presence of other car guys, I frequently ask this question to get a conversation going. Used to be a time when the answer was obvious. Cadillac, Lincoln, Imperial etc. defined luxury cars. Why? Usually it was their size, comfort and amenities i.e. power windows, power brakes, power steering etc. Today most plain Jane, entry level cars would put luxury cars of the past to shame, with what the newer cars offer as standard. Remember when A/C was a high priced option? So how do we define luxury today. Price? options? Wouldn't the Mazda CX-9 qualify as a luxury model? Its their top of the line, and the most expensive model. How about a top of the line Chevy Tahoe, coming in at 65K+?
Quote from: e.mason on January 13, 2018, 09:59:47 AM
Which begs the question. What qualifies a car to be a "luxury" car"? When in the presence of other car guys, I frequently ask this question to get a conversation going. Used to be a time when the answer was obvious. Cadillac, Lincoln, Imperial etc. defined luxury cars. Why? Usually it was their size, comfort and amenities i.e. power windows, power brakes, power steering etc. Today most plain Jane, entry level cars would put luxury cars of the past to shame, with what the newer cars offer as standard. Remember when A/C was a high priced option? So how do we define luxury today. Price? options? Wouldn't the Mazda CX-9 qualify as a luxury model? Its their top of the line, and the most expensive model. How about a top of the line Chevy Tahoe, coming in at 65K+?
The lines are heavily being blurred as the years pass by in my experience, my 17 Impala feels like a borderline luxury car, and I still think to this day that it is one of the most underrated, undervalued, yet one of the most over achieving, well put together cars in the market. GM did extremely well with its Epsilon II platform and the 3.6 V6 engine paired to it’s 6 speed trans which is a match made in heaven.
Where luxury cars actually stand out these days vs 50 years ago, is mostly in high end advanced tech, not necessarily based on its size or even performance because a lot of non luxury cars are just as powerful as a mommy commuter mobile.
Attention to detail, solidarity of the body structure, heavy curb weight, high quality materials from seat quality to window switches and button heft all are part of what makes a real luxury car today.
So some things are the same in that sense, like build quality, but there’s an increasingly diverse amounts of ways now that luxury automakers are forced to do in order to justify the asking price for what they’re making because so many non luxury cars these days also have very nice interiors, are well equipped with the latest safety and tech features, are quiet to drive, and are reliable.
It’s not the 50’s and 60’s anymore when Cadillac pretty much sold cars by the truck load based off their massive size, road presence, great styling attributes, quality of materials, power accessories, engine performance, spacious interior room and surpreme riding comfort and it’s prestige..
It was really a simple formula that worked for years for the brand, but like every great giant, they eventually fall from grace and lose their ways.
I still believe a very high quality interior, high end advanced tech, and styling is what makes all the difference in the world. So the top of the line Chevy Tahoe can be luxurious, but to what extent? It might have all the tech features that’s in a Escalade, but the door panels have cheap hard plastic on them or the seats leather feels less plush and thick compared to an Escalade.
For the Escalade you’re mostly paying for its size and styling, as it’s considered the Fleetwood Brougham of our era, rather for the interior quality per say since a $75,000 equipped Hyundai G90 has better quality door panels than an Escalade and that’s pretty shocking considering how damn expensive an Escalade is.
I will agree tho, it is getting very hard to justify moving up to something more pricey.
Quote from: 64CaddieLacky on January 13, 2018, 11:18:36 AM
I still believe a very high quality interior, high end advanced tech, and styling is what makes all the difference in the world. So the top of the line Chevy Tahoe can be luxurious, but to what extent? It might have all the tech features that’s in a Escalade, but the door panels have cheap hard plastic on them or the seats leather feels less plush and thick compared to an Escalade.
For the Escalade you’re mostly paying for its size and styling, as it’s considered the Fleetwood Brougham of our era, rather for the interior quality per say since a $75,000 equipped Hyundai G90 has better quality door panels than an Escalade and that’s pretty shocking considering how damn expensive an Escalade is.
I will agree tho, it is getting very hard to justify moving up to something more pricey.
Lets bring the GMC Yukon Denali into the conversation.
https://www.cheatsheet.com/automobiles/cadillac-escalade-vs-gmc-yukon-denali-buy-this-not-that.html/?a=viewall
Cadillac DTS "Comfortable"
https://youtu.be/_ZDvvj49_p4 (https://youtu.be/_ZDvvj49_p4)
Quote from: D.Smith on January 13, 2018, 12:22:10 PM
Cadillac DTS "Comfortable"
https://youtu.be/_ZDvvj49_p4 (https://youtu.be/_ZDvvj49_p4)
Wasn't this commercial criticized for being somewhat elitist?
Quote from: e.mason on January 13, 2018, 09:59:47 AM
Which begs the question. What qualifies a car to be a "luxury" car"? When in the presence of other car guys, I frequently ask this question to get a conversation going. Used to be a time when the answer was obvious. Cadillac, Lincoln, Imperial etc. defined luxury cars. Why? Usually it was their size, comfort and amenities i.e. power windows, power brakes, power steering etc. Today most plain Jane, entry level cars would put luxury cars of the past to shame, with what the newer cars offer as standard. Remember when A/C was a high priced option? So how do we define luxury today. Price? options? Wouldn't the Mazda CX-9 qualify as a luxury model? Its their top of the line, and the most expensive model. How about a top of the line Chevy Tahoe, coming in at 65K+?
I'd say most people still associate certain makes as luxury brands. These include Cadillac, Lincoln, Acura, Audi, BMW, Infiniti, Jaguar, Lexus, Mercedes-Benz, Volvo, etc. Many people buy a luxury car not for the features or options but rather the brand/image. Hyundai created the Genesis brand because of that. Toyota created the Lexus brand because of that. Nissan created the Infiniti brand because of that. Honda created the Acura brand because of that. And so on and so on.
Quote from: Big Apple Caddy on January 13, 2018, 12:54:24 PM
I'd say most people still associate certain makes as luxury brands. These include Cadillac, Lincoln, Acura, Audi, BMW, Infiniti, Jaguar, Lexus, Mercedes-Benz, Volvo, etc. Many people buy a luxury car not for the features or options but rather the brand/image. Hyundai created the Genesis brand because of that. Toyota created the Lexus brand because of that. Nissan created the Infiniti brand because of that. Honda created the Acura brand because of that. And so on and so on.
Interesting observation and opinion. Would you agree that luxury car market is a bit crowded today, when compared to the past? Do you think that Cadillac is the leader of the pack and sets the standard as it did years ago?
Quote from: e.mason on January 13, 2018, 12:26:13 PM
Wasn't this commercial criticized for being somewhat elitist?
No, this one (below) was the one that was criticized for being too "American".
https://youtu.be/xNzXze5Yza8 (https://youtu.be/xNzXze5Yza8)
Quote from: D.Smith on January 13, 2018, 01:08:43 PM
No, this one (below) was the one that was criticized for being to "American".
https://youtu.be/xNzXze5Yza8 (https://youtu.be/xNzXze5Yza8)
Oh yes, forgot about that one.
The comfort and fittings of all cars built these days would classify them as being prestige vehicles a few years ago. Even the cheapest of the cheap ones.
Bruce. >:D
Quote from: The Tassie Devil(le) on January 13, 2018, 05:05:12 PM
The comfort and fittings of all cars built these days would classify them as being prestige vehicles a few years ago. Even the cheapest of the cheap ones.
Bruce. >:D
Aha! My thinking exactly!
Quote from: e.mason on January 13, 2018, 01:03:28 PM
Interesting observation and opinion. Would you agree that luxury car market is a bit crowded today, when compared to the past? Do you think that Cadillac is the leader of the pack and sets the standard as it did years ago?
I don't know about "crowded" but there are a number of strong players in the luxury market these days.
How are we defining a leader? I've never felt Cadillac was the "Standard of the World" except maybe when that world was basically just Lincoln and Chrysler/Imperial. I do think Cadillac remains the top
DOMESTIC luxury brand today.
Quote from: Big Apple Caddy on January 14, 2018, 09:21:29 AM
I don't know about "crowded" but there are a number of strong players in the luxury market these days.
How are we defining a leader? I've never felt Cadillac was the "Standard of the World" except maybe when that world was basically just Lincoln and Chrysler/Imperial. I do think Cadillac remains the top DOMESTIC luxury brand today.
Lets start with how Cadillac began being the "Standard of the World". Cadillac was the first American car to win the Royal Automobile Club of the United Kingdom's Dewar Trophy by successfully demonstrating the interchangeability of its component parts during a reliability test in 1908; this spawned the firm's slogan "Standard of the World". It won the trophy again in 1912 for incorporating electric starting and lighting in a production automobile. I believe in the beginning, all automobiles were considered a "luxury" purchase. It wasn't until Henry Ford came along and made purchasing an automobile more affordable for the everyday individual. Along the way other marquees came along, and with Cadillac defined what a luxury car was i.e. Packard, Dusenberg, Pierce-Arrow etc. Like everything else in life, only the strong survive.
My question asking if Cadillac was the leader of the pack, included all the makes available, not just the domestics. Allow me to digress for a moment. Even with the domestics, how do we define "luxury"? Using price and amenities, most makes offer a "luxury" model. Chevy has Tahoes, GMC has their Denali models. Buick is introducing their Enclave Avenir model, which is just shy of $60,000.00! We are in a whole new era of defining what class an automobile falls into.
Domestics compared to the imports? The only real difference is that with the domestics, the profits stay here, with the imports the profits go out of the country. Other then that, their really isn't much difference. When the imports started to make inroads in the US. One of the major problems for the imports was the getting parts for repairs. Many times there was a substantial wait period for the part to come from Japan etc. Not the case situation anymore. Repairs on the imports are just as quick and efficient as with the domestics. Just look at all the factories the imports have built in this company. The fact is, automobiles of all makes and models are in the global market place. I think that Buick still sells more cars in China, then they do here.
Cadillac the top luxury brand in a field of two? Sure, but in the entire market place, they are an also ran.
Quote from: e.mason on January 14, 2018, 11:56:56 AM
My question asking if Cadillac was the leader of the pack, included all the makes available, not just the domestics. Allow me to digress for a moment. Even with the domestics, how do we define "luxury"? Using price and amenities, most makes offer a "luxury" model. Chevy has Tahoes, GMC has their Denali models. Buick is introducing their Enclave Avenir model, which is just shy of $60,000.00! We are in a whole new era of defining what class an automobile falls into.
Luxury vehicles from Buick are nothing new. Oldsmobile had offered luxury models as well. But overall Cadillac has been considered GM's luxury brand just as Lincoln is Ford's luxury brand.
Quote from: e.mason on January 14, 2018, 11:56:56 AM
I think that Buick still sells more cars in China, then they do here.
Buick sells far more vehicles in China than here. Even Cadillac now sells more vehicles in China than here.
Quote from: e.mason on January 14, 2018, 11:56:56 AM
Cadillac the top luxury brand in a field of two? Sure, but in the entire market place, they are an also ran.
I think Cadillac is more than just an "also ran" but they need to expand their crossover offerings, which they will be doing over the next few years, and continue to try to shake their old man car land yacht image. Adding a high performance sports car may help there. Although I am not quite sold on BEVs yet, adding a competitive BEV to the lineup would also be a plus for the brand.
Quote from: Big Apple Caddy on January 14, 2018, 03:26:33 PM
Luxury vehicles from Buick are nothing new. Oldsmobile had offered luxury models as well. But overall Cadillac has been considered GM's luxury brand just as Lincoln is Ford's luxury brand.
Both Buick and Oldsmobile were stepping stones for consumers to eventually show they "have arrived". Of course the higher priced Buicks, Roadmasters, and Oldsmobiles "98's" were either a little expensive or the same as an entry level Cadillac. Yes Cadillac still remains the "luxury brand", but the other GM marques can have models much more expensive. I realize that I am using cost as a criteria for defining luxury. After all, is extra cost part of something being luxurious?
QuoteBuick sells far more vehicles in China than here. Even Cadillac now sells more vehicles in China than here.Quote
Why is that? Are there more affluent people in Communist China, then there are in Capitalist USA?
QuoteI think Cadillac is more than just an "also ran" but they need to expand their crossover offerings, which they will be doing over the next few years, and continue to try to shake their old man car land yacht image. Adding a high performance sports car may help there. Although I am not quite sold on BEVs yet, adding a competitive BEV to the lineup would also be a plus for the brand.
Quote
I have always thought that the bigger Buick Enclave should have been the Cadillac offering and the Cadillac crossover should have been the Buick. Didn't Cadillac build their reputation on size and comfort? When I used the term "also ran". I made it in reference to how Cadillac was thought of in the past as compared to now. Given that I am of Social Security age, I admit that I am somewhat out of touch, as to how prospective luxury car buyers of today think, compared to the past. In the past, almost universally, Cadillac was the go to brand for luxury. They only had Lincoln and Chrysler to contend to. Today? Well I think its obvious they don't rule the roost like they used to.
The badge matters to many luxury car owners, and Cadillac hasn’t really been relevant for quite sometime and it has lost its cache. If every wealthy person on your block bought a Caddy, it might inspire you to do the same since so many of your neighbors are buying em. We tend to buy new things that others have, be it cars to appliances, and we also assume a certain brand is great just because your friends and family says so.
I will say, compared to a Mercedes, Cadillac interiors still aren’t that high in quality vs the Luxury imports. They’re getting fairly close tho.
Styling is subjective, but obviously something is wrong with the current Cadillac models. People for whatever reasons aren’t warming up to it’s styling.
As others stated, the competition had become fierce that not only is Cadillac competing with other luxury makes, but now Kia, Genesis, Ford, Tesla, Buick, Chevy, and pretty much everything else on the road because luxury features that wasn’t available on cars that are a few years old, are now standard in many mainstream commuter vehicles.
Quote from: e.mason on January 14, 2018, 03:49:11 PM
Why is that? Are there more affluent people in Communist China, then there are in Capitalist USA?
For one thing, China is a larger auto market than the U.S. I think around 29 million new vehicles were sold in China last year compared to 17.2 million here in the U.S. Additionally, I guess many Chinese want their premium and luxury vehicles to be import brands. Not unlike many Americans.
Quote from: e.mason on January 14, 2018, 03:49:11 PM
I have always thought that the bigger Buick Enclave should have been the Cadillac offering and the Cadillac crossover should have been the Buick. Didn't Cadillac build their reputation on size and comfort?
Cadillac will get its own “Enclave†crossover in the upcoming XT6. They will also be adding a crossover smaller than the XT5.
For "size", Cadillac has the Escalades.
Quote from: Big Apple Caddy on January 15, 2018, 01:32:44 PM
For one thing, China is a larger auto market than the U.S. I think around 29 million new vehicles were sold in China last year compared to 17.2 million here in the U.S. Additionally, I guess many Chinese want their premium and luxury vehicles to be import brands. Not unlike many Americans.Quote
But isn't China a Communist country, and as such, the citizens aren't able to participate in the benefits of capitalism?
QuoteCadillac will get its own “Enclave†crossover in the upcoming XT6. They will also be adding a crossover smaller than the XT5.
For "size", Cadillac has the Escalades.
By Cadillacs own definition the Escalade is a SUV, which is built on a Truck platform. Again Cadillac is coming the table late with what the buying public wants. Why the Goldilocks sizes of Crossovers? Because Buick and Chevy does it? Whose leading who around here?
Quote from: e.mason on January 15, 2018, 02:04:40 PM
But isn't China a Communist country, and as such, the citizens aren't able to participate in the benefits of capitalism?
China is really more socialist.
Quote from: e.mason on January 15, 2018, 02:04:40 PM
By Cadillacs own definition the Escalade is a SUV, which is built on a Truck platform. Again Cadillac is coming the table late with what the buying public wants. Why the Goldilocks sizes of Crossovers? Because Buick and Chevy does it? Whose leading who around here?
It's more because luxury brands like Audi, BMW, Lexus, Mercedes, etc do it.
Even the communist aren't really communist any more.
Bob
I would guess that China is more nationalist, but with a tradition that leads to socialist rhetoric and an eschewing of individual rights.
But there is a lot of money there for sure, and maybe one has the right to flaunt it if they are in with the right people. So, buy a Cadillac. In China, if it doesn't show you have made it, maybe it shows you are made.