2010 Cadillac Cts-v Sedan Pano Roof Recaro Nav 19's 28k Texas Direct Auto on 2040-cars

Auto blog

GM wants to have 10 plug-in models in China in five years

Last we checked, General Motors was selling all of three plug-in vehicle models in its home country of the US, and is prepared to make the Chevrolet Bolt EV available on these shores later this year. So it's notable that the automaker is hatching plans to have at least 10 plug-in variants for sale in China within the next five years, according to Hybrid Cars. Which plug-ins are coming remains a mystery. GM started selling a hybrid version of the Buick LaCrosse in China this month. The strategy makes sense, as China is now the world's largest car market, and accounts for about a third of GM's annual revenue. The automaker, which operates in China under the SAIC-GM and SAIC-GM-Wuling joint ventures, sells cars there under the Chevrolet, Buick, Cadillac, and Boujun badges, and has been doing so for the better part of two decades. Most recently, GM started selling a hybrid version of the Buick LaCrosse in China this month. What we do know is that GM is building its Cadillac CT6 Plug-in Hybrid in China, with distribution to be split between China and the US. That model, which is scheduled to start sales by the end of the year, is being built overseas because of a combination of Chinese government support for new-energy vehicle technology through incentives and the fact that battery-pack maker LG Chem makes most of its cells in nearby South Korea. The plug-ins are part of a broader plan by General Motors to either introduce or substantially tweak about 60 models by the end of the decade. With such new models, GM looks to boost unit sales by as much as five percent a year for the next few years. As for the other nine plug-in models slated for China by 2021, the company is mum. GM spokesman Dan Flores declined to comment to AutoblogGreen. Related Video: Featured Gallery 2016 Cadillac CT6: First Drive View 32 Photos News Source: Hybrid Cars Green Cadillac Chevrolet GM Electric Hybrid PHEV

GM admits Cadillac ELR no real competition for Tesla Model S

Last year, then-CEO of General Motors, Dan Akerson, made it clear that the company lookouts at the Ren Cen had California automaker Tesla in their sights. "If you want to compete head-to-head with Tesla, and we ultimately will, you want to do it with a Cadillac," he said. So, given the fact that the Cadillac ELR has a plug and sells for roughly the same price at the Tesla Model S ($75,000 vs $69,900, before incentives) and that Cadillac doesn't have any other electric vehicle on the horizon, you'd be forgiven if you thought that the way that Akerson wanted to challenge Tesla's EV success was with the ELR. Well, you'd apparently be wrong. "The ELR is a different car, it's a different price point. It's way-different technology." - GM's Mark Reuss Speaking yesterday in Detroit, GM's head of global product development, Mark Reuss, admitted that the ELR is not the Tesla competitor that Akerson promised. "People like to say the ELR is [competition for the Model S], but it's really not. It's a different car, it's a different price point. It's way-different technology." So, if we follow that logic to conclusion with Akerson's quote from last year, then the only way that Cadillac can eventually compete with Tesla is with a pure electric car, and that seems an outside chance, at best, for the foreseeable future. Through the end of July, Cadillac has sold 578 ELRs since it went on sale earlier this year. Tesla doesn't break out monthly US sales, but has sold 15,114 Model S EVs around the world in the first six months of 2014. For his part, Tesla CEO Elon Musk has already said that GM is headed down the wrong path with plug-in hybrids like the ELR or the Chevy Volt. Speaking about the Volt last year, Musk said, Chevy "sort of created something that's a bit of amphibian," which resulted in a car that's, "Okay but not great."

Dealers mobilize to protect their margins from automaker subscription services

Six individual auto brands — Lincoln, Cadillac, Porsche, Mercedes, BMW and Volvo — have established or are trialing a vehicle subscription service in the U.S. Three third-party companies — Flexdrive, Clutch and Carma — run brand-agnostic subscription services. And three automakers — Mercedes-Benz, BMW, and General Motors — have also launched short-term rental services. Dealers, afraid of how these trends might affect their margins, are building political and lawmaking campaigns to protect their revenue streams. So far, three states are investigating automaker subscriptions, and Indiana has banned any such service until next year. It's certain that those three states are the first fronts in a long political and legal battle. Powerful dealer franchise laws mandate the existence of dealers and restrict how automakers are allowed to interact with customers to sell a vehicle. On top of that, Bob Reisner, CEO of Nassau Business Funding & Services, said, "Dealers and their associations are among the strongest political operators in many states. They as a group are difficult for state politicians to vote against." In California earlier this year, the state Assembly debated a bill with wide-ranging provisions to protect against what the California New Car Dealers Association called "inappropriate treatment of dealers by manufacturers." One of those provisions stipulated that subscription services need to go through dealers, but that item got stripped out when dealers and manufacturers agreed to discuss the matter further. In Indiana, Gov. Eric Holcomb signed a moratorium on all subscription programs by dealers or manufacturers until May 1, 2019, to give legislators more time to investigate. Dealers in New Jersey have taken their campaign to the state capitol, asking that the cars in subscription programs get a different classification for registration purposes. Automakers run the current subscription services and own the vehicles. Sign-ups and financial transactions happen online or through apps, leaving dealers to do little more than act as fulfillment centers to various degrees, with little legal recourse as to compensation amounts when they're called on to deliver or service a car. That's a bad base to build on for business owners who've sunk millions of dollars into their operations.