Beautyful 92 Coupe Deville on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Bring back the Bronco! Trademarks we hope are actually (someday) future car names

Trademark filings are the tea leaves of the auto industry. Read them carefully – and interpret them correctly – and you might be previewing an automaker's future product plans. Yes, they're routinely filed to maintain the rights to an iconic name. And sometimes they're only for toys and clothing. But not always. Sometimes, the truth is right in front of us. The trademark is required because a company actually wants to use the name on a new car. With that in mind, here's a list of intriguing trademark filings we want to see go from paperwork to production reality. Trademark: Bronco Company: Ford Previous Use: The Bronco was a long-running SUV that lived from 1966-1996. It's one of America's original SUVs and was responsible for the increased popularity of the segment. Still, it's best known as O.J. Simpson's would-be getaway car. We think: The Bronco was an icon. Everyone seems to want a Wrangler-fighter – Ford used to have a good one. Enough time has passed that the O.J. police chase isn't the immediate image conjured by the Bronco anymore. Even if we're doing a wish list in no particular order, the Bronco still finds its way to the top. For now (unfortunately), it's just federal paperwork. Rumors on this one can get especially heated. The official word from a Ford spokesman is: "Companies renew trademark filings to maintain ownership and control of the mark, even if it is not currently used. Ford values the iconic Bronco name and history." Trademarks: Aviator, AV8R Company: Ford Previous Use: The Aviator was one of the shortest-run Lincolns ever, lasting for the 2003-2005 model years. It never found the sales success of the Ford Explorer, with which it shared a platform. We Think: The Aviator name no longer fits with Lincoln's naming nomenclature. Too bad, it's better than any other name Lincoln currently uses, save for its former big brother, the Navigator. Perhaps we're barking up the wrong tree, though. Ford has made several customized, aviation themed-Mustangs in the past, including one called the Mustang AV8R in 2008, which had cues from the US Air Force's F-22 Raptor fighter jet. It sold for $500,000 at auction, and the glass roof – which is reminiscent of a fighter jet cockpit – helped Ford popularize the feature. Trademark: EcoBeast Company: Ford Previous Use: None by major carmakers.

GM slashes prices in China as sales falter

Buying a vehicle from General Motors' stable of brands might be a lot cheaper in the near future – at least for customers in China. The effort comes as GM hopes to keep sales there growing, and the decision alludes to yet another sign that the Asian country no longer has the booming auto market of past years. GM and its Chinese joint venture partner SAIC are slashing prices by as much as the equivalent to $8,700 on 40 models from Buick, Chevrolet, and Cadillac, according to The Detroit News. Across all of automaker's nameplates, the overall sales dipped in China in April by 0.4 percent to 258,484 vehicles. Among the drops, Buick was down 8.5 percent, and Chevy shrunk 5.6 percent. Caddy's numbers increased 4.6 percent for the month, though. Buick remains a popular brand in the minds of Chinese consumers, but according to The Detroit News domestic automakers there are starting to eat into the dominance of foreign companies in the market. The country remains important for GM, though. Late last year, it outlined a future strategy that included China as a major pillar, including a $14 billion investment to build five new factories and boost sales. News Source: The Detroit NewsImage Credit: Alexander F. Yuan / AP Photo Buick Cadillac Chevrolet GM Car Buying Car Dealers saic

Johan de Nysschen tells his side of the story

Automobile snagged time with ex-Cadillac, Infiniti, and Volkswagen of America boss Johan de Nysschen. General Motors decided to part ways with de Nysschen on April 18, 2018, after the German spent four years in charge of America's luxury brand. The longtime auto exec is a polarizing figure for enthusiasts, who seem to take a mostly negative view of his work at Infiniti and Cadillac. However, there's no denying de Nysschen is frank, and in the Automobile interview he puts an insider's perspective on a big bag of issues we can only speculate on. One of the biggest bombshells in the interview was that it wasn't de Nysschen's idea to move Cadillac to New York: "When I was recruited, I was informed that the company would relocate to New York," he said. Previous GM CEO Dan Ackerson had made the decision before hiring de Nysschen, then Ackerson let his new hire make the announcement. The big change came only two years after de Nysschen had taken over Infiniti after insisting Nissan's luxury brand move to Hong Kong. De Nysschen explained Cadillac's NYC move with the same rationale as Infiniti's Hong Kong move, so everyone assumed the new guy was doing his usual. He explains in the interview that after the move, "Folks who rooted for Detroit felt betrayed. Cadillac had an enemy." And that became a problem. He has nothing bad to say about GM or Cadillac, believing on the contrary that "GM is in a good position going forward." But he brought clarity to some of Cadillac's struggles. Among the issues was GM's "very vigorous" post-bankruptcy test for green-lighting a project. Another was the lack of specialization for the luxury arm. "Engines were generically developed with the Chevy brand in mind," he said, "and, then, 'Okay, well, yeah, it's good enough for Cadillac.'" That carried over into haphazard technology rollouts. "GM didn't have a specific technology roadmap aligned to particular brands," he said. "The process was, as they were developing new technologies, they would look at what product's launch date would be aligned with the maturation date and market readiness of a technology and go with it, whether Buick, Chevy, or what have you." De Nysschen worked to end such generalized approaches, which is how we get Cadillac taking the GM lead on technology and electrification.