[hans007]

Originally Posted by boltjames

You know those wisecracks I was making about the 1984 Cimmaron?

Turns out I was correct. The ATS is a cheap, small Cadillac. It is not edgy or attractive; if anything, it's just a knockoff of the CTS.

It's too small for Cadillac's core customer, it's too low-end for any true luxury car owner, it's a car with no audience. Hard to believe that GM's current management fell into the same trap again.

BJ

still don't really get what they are thinking, at least business case wise. if you price out fairly similar cars, especially since the sport trims on the ATS are pretty expensive, an equivalent 328i costs the same.

amazingly it actually costs more. so a "luxury" trim ats 2.0t STARTS at msrp $39395 (and doesnt include xenons which aren't even an option!) , performance is $41895 (standard xenons , but for some reason no folding rear seat) for automatic versions (and lets not kid ourselves as a business case, we dont even need to think about the manual version given that means basically 0 in the real world, but they do give a $1260 discount for taking a manual, whereas BMW gives you $0 for taking a manual). destination for cadillacs is $895 just like BMW, and i did not include it in any of these prices. Also interestingly enough the CTS 3.6 V6 "performance" trim is 43430 MSRP AND it has the 18" rims and is bigger so it will play better to cadillac's traditional "i need a big ass american car" demographic. the CTS actaully IS a good value, and it only costs $1000 more than the ATS 2.0T performance if you adjust for the 18" seats. even more stupid, the 3.6 ATS performance base MSRP is ~$600 more than a CTS 3.6 performance model. WTF GM?

on carsdirect the target price is actually $500 over msrp , which is pure insanity but then again there arent that many 2.0T ones yet.

that said, the people running cadillac must be idiots. a 328i with say sport line, and automatic costs $39000 exactly MSRP. Now content wise its slightly different, the BMW has no leather seats (i think all the cadillacs have those 2), and cadillac's 18" rims are an extra $800. that said, the fact the BMW at this point costs less than either ATS is already terrible even if some of the cadillacs have a few extra miscellaneous features. it shouldn't even be close in price, it just makes 99% of people go with the "safe" choice (the BMW, which is obviously a BMW, and has a good reputation).

so for $39000 you are slightly under the "luxury" ats. of course thats the minimum you can pay for a luxury or sports ATS. in a weird twist BMW allows people to pay less for less features. so lets say you want don't want xenons , but want the sportier seats in the ATS 2.0 "performance" , you can spec a 328i like that, you can't actually do it on an ATS. so at this point your only big difference is leather seats and a large amount of people would probably say an ATS with cheap entry level leather (like most entry level cars) vs a BMW with basically the same features (with sport seats and sport suspension, or i suppose you could build a luxury line and probably be roughly equivalent too) is probably the right choice.

my point is..... the cars are roughly the same cost for all the important features. as much as BMW / cadillac reviews rave about it, the average "i want a nice car" consumer, really probably doesnt care about features like variable steering, dynamic handling, radar cruise, heads up displays, and blind spot detection radars etc. they just want to get in a car with the big checkbox features like "non cloth seats" (i seriously believe its more a matter of not being cloth than being leather, most under $70k car leather is not particularly good anyway) , "moonroof", "premium compared to a camry audio", "more power", "xenons" , "nav" etc. and obviously badge.

so value proposition lets just call it a wash for discussion sake. for most people they cost the same. BMW has more prestige than cadillac, i think objectively we can agree on that. So who buys an ATS and why? no one.

I remember when the original G35 came out, and people said it was a really good competitor to the E46 325i. it had a ton of power, it costs a lot less, and it was pretty sporty and well balanced, and ok maybe a little unrefinied with a fairly weak (though slightly better during its refresh) interior. I would know I bought one. But one thing really helped sell that car was even with its flaws it was really cheap. It was a GOOD VALUE. at the time a 325i was putting out what 184hp, vs 280 in the G35. You felt like you were paying less for at least more power even if other things were not equivalent. so infiniti made a name for itself at least for having a reason to buy it (now not so much as the G37 is actaully sort of expensive in sport trims).


So cadillac on the other hand, given the cost is the same, doesn't really provide more. It provides at best the same, and probably for more intensive purposes is a slightly worse car than the BMW with less prestige (and lets not kid ourselves this is important to most buyers). I mean I know this is a BMW forum, maybe the ATS handles slightly better, but most other things are at best equivalent or worse (and most reviews seem to indicate this). So you are going to buy 90% of a BMW, for 100% of the price with less badge prestige? i think not. maybe you will if the cadillac costs.... 85-90% of the BMW right, then at least you'd be gettting value or proportionate cost right?

See I don't run GM. I apparently am not stupid enough to. I'm predicting now, that maybe the ATS sells well at first to people who want to be "different". Eventually those people get theirs (just like PT cruisers or camaros were going for MSRP their first year etc) and then the rest of the ATSes just sit there or get sold to rental fleets. cadillac is forced to put $5000 discounts relative to BMW to move metal. so now the ATS is priced 85-90% of a 328i where it should have been in the first place, except now you have the stigma of , "it must suck because they are so discounted from MSRP" and "eh they have rental car versions of this at hertz just like the CTS". This is not how your build prestige, and not how you build a reputation for value. At least infiniti knew how to build a reputation for value.

of course GM doesn't think long term so this will probably be a mediocre success if it even is one. You have to give the engineers at GM credit for actually building a very good car (even if its 90% of a 328i, that is still very good). But their upper management is going to ruin this anyway. If they wanted to really steal BMW/audi/mercedes buyers they would just slash $5000 off the price of all the ATS MSRP just to make people even think of it as a competitor with the value proposition (obviously GM has not read the lexus/ infiniti play book... i'm assuming hyundai did this when they built the genesis). While they are at is get rid of the 2.5L model (it seems to me this is just some idiotic ploy to sell rental cars, and use up engine plant capacity, probably 2 things some accountant told them to do, when its not what makes a premium marque in america). And also limit sales to hertz , or say only sell loaded versions to hertz for cheap (when you rent a stripper CTS, 300 whatever, you are not exactly getting the best impression right?) . That would be investing for the long term, but GM doesnt do that. Yes GM hire me, hans007, i don't have an MBA but I think i've thought this out more than your people. This may be where Ford is smart. They know they can't compete with lincoln so they don't even try in this segment until they can come out with something that will build brand equity.