Ask the Car People.SM


Where Is Ford taking the Lincoln Motor Company?

4163 messages,  Last post on May 17, 2013 at 6:43 AM

You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum.

What is this discussion about? Lincoln Zephyr, Lincoln MKS, Lincoln MKX

    

Messages Page 371 of 417

#3697 of 4163 Re: Lincoln? [akirby] by gregg_vw

Aug 08, 2012 (7:02 am)

Replying to: akirby (Aug 07, 2012 5:59 pm)
Allen said: Cadillac tried that with the CTS and the new ATS and so far all it got them was bankruptcy.
 
We all know you hate GM and treat it like a rival football team, rather than a rival company that has had its ups and downs like Ford. GM did go bankrupt. However, since then, there have been many quarters of profits, just as with Ford and Chrysler. So, your "so far" comment is inaccurate spin.
 
ATS was just introduced and is not yet reflected in any sales. Compact luxury sedans are a hot spot in the market (BMW 3, Mercedes C, Audi A4, Lexus IS) and the ATS is poised to do ok for a brand new entry. Lincol n still doesn't have a firm plan to even enter this segment.
 
The CTS was an unreliable car out of the gate, but sales of the first and second generation sustained Cadillac, while it got other models to market. The third generation will be out shortly, and improvements will continue.
 
If you keep saying that Lincoln needs time to show what it can do, why do you not give the same leeway to other brands? Besides, even if Cadillac does not deserve the same consideration that you always ask everyone to give Lincoln, sales speak. July 2012 had no ATS sales due to unavailability, and the XTS is only a month old in the market. Nonetheless, it was Cadillac 13,417, Lincoln 6,975.
 
Both brands obviously have rebuilding to do. In 1998, Lincoln was the best-selling luxury brand. It has been downhill ever since, no matter what they have tried or not tried. New investment in the brand is being made, but the changes are coming slow. The MKS, which has never lived up to expectations (and why should it have?...just look at the dowdy thing) will not be completely revamped until the 2016 model year. By then Cadillac will have also added its rear drive flagship to its fleet.
 
Here's another reason to temper your Cadillac bashing. Lincoln hired Max Wolff away from Cadillac where he was in charge of the exterior design of the XTS. He has now overseen the redesign of the 2013 MKZ. So, we are supposed to disparage his talent when he is with GM and laud it when he comes over to Ford?

#3698 of 4163 Re: Lincoln? [gregg_vw] by lemko

Aug 08, 2012 (11:28 am)

Replying to: gregg_vw (Aug 08, 2012 7:02 am)
Lincoln needs to find Elwood Engel. Now THAT guy could design a Lincoln!
 

#3699 of 4163 Re: Lincoln? [lemko] by gregg_vw

Aug 08, 2012 (4:58 pm)

Replying to: lemko (Aug 08, 2012 11:28 am)
The 1960s Continental was iconic. There have been a few other Lincolns that earned that status as well. However, the people that oversaw the brand never understood what made those few models stand out.
 
Luxury car buyers now demand stellar products, since these days even the plebeian models are remarkably good and remarkably well-equipped.
 
For anyone to have thought that the MKS would be competitive just shows that there was no understanding on the part of the people who held the reins. I can't imagine why such highly paid people were so clueless, and how they ever got into positions of control. Perhaps now, as Allen claims, they have finally gotten the drift. It is as they say about time.

#3700 of 4163 Re: Lincoln? [gregg_vw] by akirby

Aug 08, 2012 (6:08 pm)

Replying to: gregg_vw (Aug 08, 2012 7:02 am)
 Ok let's go over this one more time.
 
I respect the current CTS as a stand alone vehicle. I have no issue with the XTS or ATS either from a vehicle standpoint.
 
The only problem I see with the XTS is that it's almost a clone of the MKS from a platform/feature/performance standpoint except that it does not have a 365 hp option yet. Styling is subjective but from an objective standpoint it's virtually identical, but GM fans act like it's so much better. It's not - it's a nice niche vehicle just like the MKS. There isn't a big market for either one any more.
 
The problem with the CTS and ATS is how much money GM wasted on platforms to get to where they are today and their obsession with making a "bmw whatever fighter". Thus my comments about bankruptcy because that was a big part of it. Throw in other failed "home run swings" like the XLR and I just don't understand the decision making.
 
Lincoln has obviously not gotten any really good products since the LS and even it had problems. But at the same time Ford wasn't wasting money on bespoke expensive platforms. The current game plan to have 7 new vehicles within 4 years including at least 2 crossovers based mostly on existing platforms but with unique styling, features and drivetrains is a much more sound business plan than chasing one or two "bmw fighters".
 
I see Lincoln chasing Lexus and Audi and Acura and I see them being able to compete in that arena with a highly efficient cost structure which should yield nice profits. Once they're profitable they can start chasing higher performance and niche models.
 
I definitely give Caddy the nod from a performance perspective but I think the 2013 MKS and MKZ are just as good as the XTS and CTS from a luxury standpoint.
 
I think Cadillac is getting better by sharing more parts and platforms but I'd rather see them work on a comprehensive lineup of 6 or 7 good vehicles than trying to beat BMW.
 
The question is where both brands will be in 5 years. I think Lincoln will be a solidly profitable competitor with a full model lineup. I fear that Cadillac will still be swinging for the fences trying to hit that one grand slam.
 
I never liked the old Cadillac products but have no real issue with the new ones. It's the business plan for Cadillac and GM that I don't like. They simply have not changed enough of what put them into bankruptcy.
 
Look at the sales volumes of Ford and GM. Ford is usually within about 15% of GM's volume but only has about half as many employees. GM is still making too many Sonics and using factory backed sub-sub-prime financing for people with 500 credit scores to move them. They have 2 totally redundant truck brands. They haven't changed enough in my opinion.

#3701 of 4163 Re: Lincoln? [gregg_vw] by akirby

Aug 08, 2012 (6:13 pm)

Replying to: gregg_vw (Aug 08, 2012 4:58 pm)
They may have been highly paid but that doesn't mean they understood how to make a great luxury car nor does it mean they were given the funding and authority to do it. In the early 2000s they were hamstrung by Jaguar, Aston-Martin and Land Rover. They did not have a separate Lincoln design team. When Wolff saw the initial version of the 2013 MKZ he asked the designer "what were you thinking"? Dealerships were (and still are) archaic with terrible service for a luxury brand.
 
Now they have a huge dedicated Lincoln team with enough funding to do what they need to do and without any distractions like PAG or Mercury. The only thing that remains to be seen is if they can execute the plan. It's not a slam dunk but this is the best chance Lincoln has had in decades to become relevant again.

#3702 of 4163 Re: Lincoln? [akirby] by gregg_vw

Aug 09, 2012 (7:02 am)

Replying to: akirby (Aug 08, 2012 6:08 pm)
Allen,
 
Thank you for a more thoughtful response.
 
The XLR was a bold idea that didn't connect, didn't make it. (So was the CTS a bold idea, but expectations were more in line with reality.) Americans are not ready and willing to buy a $70K two seater in any great numbers. Similar models from Mercedes and Jaguar sell in very small numbers as well. The difference is that those companies don't expect expensive two seaters to have unrealistically high sales numbers.
 
It is no different from the last Thunderbird. There was nothing inherently wrong with that model, but sales projections were way out of whack for a two seater convertible. It was quickly deemed a failure, which it was not. Ford's own history should have showed them that they needed a four seat option. Thunderbird sales boomed in 1958 when rear seats were added to the design.
 
Let's not forget that Lincoln sales have sucked for far longer than Cadillac's, and none of their models introduced in the past decade have come close to sales expectations. Cadillac took a big gamble and nearly lost with its $4 billion investment in rear wheel drive. However, they are still here, people's memories of the bankruptcy will fade (as has happened more than once with Chrysler), and now they have dedicated platforms that they actually can hold up against BMW, even if BMW still has the edge.
 
Lincoln gambled on conservative investment, conservative styling (except for grills), even after Bill Ford stopped choking the brand. They may as well have gone bankrupt, because what used to be a respected luxury brand is no longer seen as such.
 
I definitely give Caddy the nod from a performance perspective but I think the 2013 MKS and MKZ are just as good as the XTS and CTS from a luxury standpoint.
 
Ok, I understand that is what you think. I disagree.
 
The MKS is not as quiet and does not ride as well as the XTS. Wolff styling is evident with the XTS. Wolff styling is evident with the 2013 MKX. Somehow he managed to make a FWD car with too short of a wheelbase for its length (the same problem the MKS has) look attractive. The XTS interior also looks far more high end than that of the MKS. It's not just GM fans who think it is better. Read the auto press which, on the whole was poised to hate it before driving it.
 
The MKZ to date is anonymous with a nondescript interior. It does not stand out in any way, nor does it have understated elegance. The driving experience is no different from that of any solid mid-size with a lot of equipment on it. I am not enamored of the "art and science" styling of the CTS, but on the street it does look like a luxury car.
 
We do agree about the old Cadillac products. Bleah!

#3703 of 4163 Re: Lincoln? [steve_] by nvbanker

Aug 09, 2012 (11:00 am)

Replying to: steve_ (Aug 07, 2012 6:19 pm)
Doesn't some make pick your car up for service too (Equus?).
 
They make that claim, but a friend has an Equus - they don't, AND when you bring it in, you get a Genesis loaner, if they have one, a Sonata if they don't, and here, they only have one Genesis loaner.
 
Overpromise, underdeliver.

#3704 of 4163 Re: Lincoln? [gregg_vw] by nvbanker

Aug 09, 2012 (11:07 am)

Replying to: gregg_vw (Aug 08, 2012 7:02 am)
GM did go bankrupt. However, since then, there have been many quarters of profits, just as with Ford and Chrysler. So, your "so far" comment is inaccurate spin.
 
That's funny. Give me 60 Billion to restructure + BK to dismiss priority debt, union contracts and pensions, and I'll have profits too. I am ok with his "spin".
 
I don't hate GM, just most of their cars.
 
OTOH, Lincoln has been an embarrssment since about 07.

#3705 of 4163 Re: Lincoln? [nvbanker] by robr2

Aug 09, 2012 (3:00 pm)

Replying to: nvbanker (Aug 09, 2012 11:00 am)
They make that claim, but a friend has an Equus - they don't, AND when you bring it in, you get a Genesis loaner, if they have one, a Sonata if they don't, and here, they only have one Genesis loaner.
 
It takes time. My boss at a job 15 years ago used to have a 7 series. His dealer provided loaners - Nissan Sentras for everyone!!

#3706 of 4163 Re: Lincoln? [nvbanker] by gregg_vw

Aug 09, 2012 (4:47 pm)

Replying to: nvbanker (Aug 09, 2012 11:07 am)
Ha!

Messages Page 371 of 417

To POST a message, please Sign In.

Advertisement

Browse by Category

Browse by Vehicle
   View All Vehicles

Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
View All Topics

Edmunds Community

Advertisement