Johan de Nysschen: The Cadillac of Interviews

[CMiatso DaBang]

What ?????? "Refuses to invest" ?????

GM announced a year ot two ago a 12 Billion $ investment in Cadillac.

I wonder what all of the Tenured automatic Nay-sayers and knee- jerk contrarians around here would be posting about the latest Cadillacs if Mr. De Nysschen was still at the helm.

Judging from the posts here, Execs at GM are considered incompetent while they're on the job and become Folk Heros when they leave.

I want to just leave this here...

Daimler to cut $6.75 billion at Mercedes

I wonder where they will make cuts... oh.. and apparently GEELY.. the Chinese company.. is a 10% shareholder in the company.. so I think I know, other than employee reduction, where that $7Billion cost reduction is going to come from..

[megeebee]

I want to just leave this here...

Daimler to cut $6.75 billion at Mercedes

I wonder where they will make cuts... oh.. and apparently GEELY.. the Chinese company.. is a 10% shareholder in the company.. so I think I know, other than employee reduction, where that $7Billion cost reduction is going to come from..

That was an interesting read.

"Manager Magazin said around 30,000 Mercedes-Benz cars with faulty vehicle electronics were produced at its plant in Tuscaloosa, Alabama, requiring expensive reworking which was causing production delays.

Those delays had led to a revenue shortfall of around 2 billion euros and could depress first quarter earnings by up to half a billion euros, the report said."

I shake to think of the multi-page threads and poison posts that would result if this had happened with Cadillac.

Separately, Kaellenius will not renew common projects with French carmaker Renault and Nissan, letting an alliance between the carmakers lapse, the magazine said. The Infiniti Q30 and QX30 are built on a Mercedes platform. Mercedes plans to explore more collaboration with Geely, which is Daimler's biggest shareholder with a 9.7 percent stake.

This too would take up vast bandwidth around here if it applied to Cadillac. I take this to read that future Mercedes will be not only built in China (as they have been for many years) but actually be based to a large degree on a Chinese company's components. It's good enough for Volvo, their being owned by Geely. But I wonder how this will go over with the German Faithful? The GLA and CLA won't be Japanese, but Chinese perhaps.

[megeebee]

I agree. But not so much for what Carlyle has done because he seems to executing what JDN had already started. I don't think the XT6 would have been any different if JDN had of stayed either

As president of Cadillac, Mr. De Nysschen was fully responsible for the design of the XT6. It's design would have to have been frozen at least 2 years ago to have it on the market this Summer. The CT5, and CT4 as well were designed under his supervision.

[sfbreh]

As far as "thinking critically", yes, it looks like cost cutting. But that is not "thinking critically", that is cherry-picking an answer to support the desired conclusion. Just like many on GMI attribute JDN with Cadillac's move to NYC, it supports their argument but is incorrect. No one on GMI has the information to tell us if there were other considerations regarding the "great glass vs. plastic debate". It could very well be cost cutting, but no one has presented me with anything to factually support that other than the aforementioned supporting a desired outcome. It is a minor piece that most people wont care about, I think it is a manifestation of some GMI members discontent with Cadillac's direction.

I'm smart enough and know enough about the industry by now to be able to confidently guess why certain things are done on cars—particularly at GM.

If I looked at a car that pretended to have a window, but really just had a piece of black plastic, I would immediately discount the car because the implications are few, and obvious:
1) a decision was made to focus on spaciousness as a USP for the product
2) a determination was made that the car WITH a sixth window-type area provided better headroom and overall sense of space
3) a determination was made that the target consumer looking for their USP (rear seat spaciousness) would not mind not having a sixth window
4) a determination was made that the car looked better WITH a sixth window than without one
5) a decision was made to SAVE MONEY (BECAUSE CADILLAC IS NOTHING SHORT OF A FINANCIAL DISAPPOINTMENT, MAKE NO MISTAKE), BECAUSE YOU CAN BET YOU'RE SAVING A FEW PENNIES ($5 DOOR HANDLES?) ON MATERIALS by just using a uniform piece of metal and a fake window-look black plastic vs glass (MORE COMPLEX SHAPE TO CUT THE SHEETMETAL) and higher strength steel (MORE EXPENSIVE MATERIAL), and that THE COMPANY WOULD BENEFIT AND THE CONSUMER WOULDN'T MIND—AND THUS IT WAS A WIN-WIN

If you can't see that this was the decision-making process regarding the C-pillar, you're not paying attention or not all that intelligent. FACTS are not necessary when DEDUCTIONS are made.

Please, DEDUCE why they faked a window and didn't just use glass—or change the design entirely.

And yes, I agree on the XT6 that it will not win over MB customer. It will pull in the soccer mom's for whom the XT5 is not large enough and the Escalade simply to big and intimidating. And yes, I also agree that Cadillac should treat each vehicle as if it is a flagship, they did not do that with the XT6. But I do not think the XT6 will hurt Cadillac either. It is more of a missed opportunity.

Cadillac has no opportunities to squander. XT6 staked out Cadillac's place in the field. It's decided it will be another Infiniti.

You don't have to treat everything like a flagship, you just have to act and create product as though you have a shred of dignity or organic identity and not just a set of delineated "CADILLAC DESIGN ELEMENTS" that, when the boxes are checked, means you have a Cadillac—and you take bold steps by "playing" with those elements.

Horizontal lights, an atypical DLO... much wow, very excite. Should've used that brainpower and design time to figure out a seat design that doesn't look like it came out of a Traverse.

And your Corvette comment goes back to my earlier comment about mainstream manufacturers struggling with also being luxury manufacturers. None seem to be able to pull it off very well. VW excels at luxury but can't do mainstream (we found out they weren't making any money off the mainstream). Infiniti and Acura are basket cases. Lexus is getting traction but still has the same disparities - super looking sleek high end which goes toe to toe with the Germans then you have the Camry based phone-it-in ES.

Lexus doesn't have the same disparities as anyone, and it's not gaining traction. It's one of the top brands in the country, outsells Cadillac, and will continue to do so. It's also one of the top in the world. Maybe only Volvo or JLR might be higher at this point, but if it's #3 here, I think it's #4 worldwide.

VW does mainstream very well—if they make no money, it's because they've wisely made the business decision to bite the bullet on the mainstream to subsidize their high-end, which has allowed them to make money hand over fist and become one of the most powerful and profitable companies in the industry. Before dieselgate, they were looking pretty much unstoppable.

And so I do agree with you that Cadillac needs to do better. JDN said the goal was to get something out there quickly that will hit the mainstream luxury market. They did that. This will sell well. Now I want to hear from Cadillac when they are going to target the top end trims. Cadillac competes with the Germans on the bottom end trim, middle trim packages and basic upper end and that's where they stop. They need to get past the "basic upper end" into Swarvosky crystal shifter knob luxury.

And we also have to take into account Cadillac's approach with interiors - minimalistic, understated, clean which if you like the Mercedes interiors you will not like Cadillac's approach and vice versa. While I recognize the luxury and opulence of the MB interiors, something about them doesn't sit well with me. I prefer the minimalistic Cadillac approach.

Cadillac's approach isn't minimalistic, it's lazy and looks like what it is: a Chevy interior that a mid-level manager argued with an upper-level manager for to get a few "class"-specific upgrades that Chevy can't get. More trim? Real wood? What else?

Cadillac's strategy is to compete on price and value, but they don't offer enough to overcome their deficiencies, as they don't get that everyone else operates on the same principles—they just don't feel the need to talk about it, because they understand that there's more to the industry than that.

Well Ed, at least I'm open to looking at other reasons. I'm also open to it being cost savings.

Since you deal only in facts (you've said that numerous times, correct?), show me some proof that it is cost savings. Sdotjeezy saying he promises us that it is cost savings is not proof. Also, reconcile your conclusion with Cadillac having made it widely known they were looking at grams of weight savings; as evidenced by the segment leading low weight for the ATS and CTS.

I really can't believe you, who prides yourself on dealing only in facts, is presenting the premise that GM is penny pinching as a fact? How do you know it isn't painted carbon fiber that is 10x more expensive than glass and therefore extremely luxurious (if it costs more than glass it is more luxurious, right?). How am I to trust your facts if you don't explore all plausible avenues? Could it be that your self appointed role as fanboy police (per the Dabangbang thread) skews you to looking at only facts that cast GM in a negative light? Do you or have you used the Lean Six Sigma approach to problems?

And let me remind you that the genesis of the black piece being penny pinching was that we had the conclusion first, that the black panel doesn't look good. Then penny pinching came later to support that. So we had the conclusion before the support. Doesn't sound like a scientific way to arrive at a "fact" to me.

I am really surprised you do not support exploring all avenues of "why", not only not supporting it, but actually mocking it.

Open to looking at other reasons? Try coming up with one like I've asked of you, instead of taking the passive aggressive, limp-wristed "WELL, MAYBE IT'S NOT AND I'M OPEN TO SUGGESTIONS. WHERE'S THE PROOF?" approach.

I support exploring all avenues of why. Explore with me. WEIGHT SAVINGS is the absolute DUMBEST possible theory, so it's not that. What else?

I was thinking of all the pages upon pages of negative JDN, MB, Reuss, and so on, yet these negative comments are based on very little data. I also supported JDN and liked this story which also seems to have changed a lot of people's opinion of him. But just one article did this, as you said, very little data. We all need to keep this in mind as we praise or condemn GM management based on an article based on our very biased journalists.

D E D U C T I V E R E A S O N I N G

[sfbreh]

The C pillar piece is plastic not glass for weight savings, NOT cost savings.

Well then you would be wrong, GM didn't stop caring about the weight all of a sudden, and they are worried down to the ounce not pound. If it did save 1-2lbs as you are guessing then it was a easy decision for them to make.

I mean technically Ed and Sdot aren't wrong, but to what degree anyone can argue. They could have made it out of diamond encrusted carbon fiber, some space age lightweight glass, or if they really didn't care about weight one big chunk of solid gold, I mean hey it's a luxury car right? Why stop there, dip the whole car in gold. Now that I think about it the fact Mercedes doesn't dip their cars in gold is cost cutting at its finest, way to cheapen out.

[sfbreh]

I'm sure the designers would have used polished Onyx if they could. As for JDN, he signed off on the CT5, just as he did on XT6 and CT4.


Assuming you meant to write "Corsair", what do you think of the complicated and obviously black plastic D Pillar treatment ?.....

DUH IS DUH WINDUH BLASDIC DOE?

The designers wouldn't use polished onyx, they would use glass—but they had to save $1 and apparently a pound, and you won't care THAT much, so you get plastic.

What else would you not care THAT much about?

....and what do I see on the RX 350:

DERE ID DIPPERENCE... LEGSUS DO DING DAT U NO EGSPEGD GLAZ. GADDILAG TRY TRICKY U... HEHE!

I must part company with you on this. I think a high performance convertible and/or coupe on the new VSS-R ( I think that's the designation) platform would be a better investment for GM.

Why?

Neither car will sell very many units, except the Corvette is already buttoned up and on the way. A VSS-R luxury coupe might be the more appropriate product, but the Vette is the better investment. And so we get the Vette.

For what you MIGHT get off VSS-R, I would expect the same justification... so I wouldn't be surprised to see a Camaro-based Cadillac in the future. For that, I'd expect it to be CT5—as those leaked patents now seem to suggest.

Cadillac went out on a limb with Alpha, and it failed spectacularly. This is one reason why we're getting the ATS again for another 6 years, and why I have serious doubts about another "Cadillac coupe" like ATS—especially when Camaro is performing so miserably, is still a "necessary" product, and intent to "redistribute" has already been suggested in Avista.

I think it would be great investment.. but I also think that the amortization of investment on the C8 would be quicker if it had a companion vehicle over at Cadillac, serving then.. two purposes. Cadillac needs this. After seeing the gorgeous, and I never say that about a Lexus, LC.. yeah.. Cadillac needs this. A friend of mine has one and even though, imo, its not that fast.. it looks sexy as F**K . And yeah.. a convertible and coupe are definitely welcome on the new platform, or hell.. the CT5

Bingo. GM isn't canning their one pet project because they can't afford the backlash, so you're getting a Corvette. If you're already on the hook for it, why not try to amortize costs as much as possible?

The Vette is the better investment.

Mr. De Nysschen oversaw the design, and signed off on, the XT6, as he did the CT5 amd CT4.

Did the same for the QX50. What went wrong between Infiniti and Cadillac?

AH, that's right...

I think 12 large is epic. To say GM is not investing "as it should", we'd need to know just how they have invested and i don't think either of us know. Lead times in the auto industry are notoriously long. I'm looking forward to the VSS-R Platform products.

At the same time GM announced their $12b for Cadillac to TRY to make a name for itself, VW announced $20b+ for Audi. It was never enough, but with a little hope and collective agreement—good things were possible.

But then reality hit.

[sfbreh]

The c-pillar plastic trim discussion is getting ridiculous.

Would it be nicer if it were glass? Yes. Is it the end of the world it's not? No.

Tint would obviously make it a mostly moot point. That said, I've not seen it in person.

It's not the trim, don't be a ninny. It's the implication that sounds off LOUD AND CLEAR to reinforce what we already suspect to be true about the cynicism of GM—the same company closing US plants and putting the Mexican Blazer on display at the Detroit Tigers' stadium.

You do not matter as a customer, and you will buy whatever we produce because you just don't care as much as some other people. Our business strategy will outlast your pride and moral integrity.

The Q7 is a very dimly lit spot in Audi's lineup which Audi even acknowledges with the debut of the Q8 which is far better presented. That being said GM needs to immediately seek to rehire JDn, and absolutely fire everyone who was for his dismissal up to, and including Barra.

The XT6 does makes sense as a rushed stop gap product that will be replaced with a proper entry into the segment in 3 years time if, and only if that is Cadillac's plan.

All true, and I was willing to accept that about XT6—but CT5's debut made it very clear that XT6 is Cadillac's idea of a real entry, not a stop gap, and it laid bare the sad truth about XT4's deficiencies. CT4 being ATS 2.0 will not help matters, and neither did the CT6 Vsport's dead.

ALL OF THIS was set in stone when GM made the VERY loud proclamations about its plans for Cadillac's future with the firing of JdN, his replacement with THE HEAD OF GM CANADA and the gifting of what I assume is an executive emeritus role to Reuss as reward for trouncing JdN, and the return of Cadillac to Detroit.

Anyone expecting what comes next to be an improvement is a fool.

I was on the Honda forum at that time and people were just as mixed about the styling of that car as the CT5. The Accord has a more pleasing shape to my eye though.

And psychologically it's an entirely different product with an entirely different set of rules. That this has to be explained means the discussion is a moot point.

[bongos2u]

Certainly that interview just further supports how asinine it was for GM to fire him. He's even astute enough not to burn his bridges by choosing his words. Although he doesn't have a good longterm view of FCA's prospects.

If I'm Hyundai, this guy goes on the short list to run Genesis. I think him and Biermann (sp?) would be a hell of a pair for an aspiring luxury division.

Spot on. I believe SangYup Lee is head of design at Hyundai / Genesis. He designed the 5th gen. Camaro. Johann, Biermann, SangYup Lee...Sounds good. My wife is interested in a new Hyundai Elantra, since GM killed the Cruze. Didn't think in my lifetime that we might purchase a Hyundai vehicle over a GM vehicle.

[sfbreh]

Spot on. I believe SangYup Lee is head of design at Hyundai / Genesis. He designed the 5th gen. Camaro. Johann, Biermann, SangYup Lee...Sounds good. My wife is interested in a new Hyundai Elantra, since GM killed the Cruze. Didn't think in my lifetime that we might purchase a Hyundai vehicle over a GM vehicle.

I believe there are a few other guys from VW at Hyundai/Kia/Genesis, too.

[germeezy1]

Cadillac has for many years suffered from too little too late, and a corporate infighting which somehow gives Chevy at times debut priority over Cadillac. You CAN NOT call yourself even in passing the standard of the world if you share many of your standards, and metrics with a mass market brand. The CT5 is the first product in years that is truly class competitive, and aside from aesthetically Cadillac has again phoned it in with the XT6.

Dear GM,

The Lexus approach of intermixing trash with treasure only works if there are true diamonds in the product lineup! It is inexcusable for every car made by your company to have at the bare minimum one glaring issue or fault!