The thing is, people see a Continental GT and think it's a $150-200k car, whereas many people would think of the Benz as $100k or less, even given that it's a '600. Still, I don't think those ugly wheels or the green paint in the photos do the car justice. I saw an '07 white CL600 with the AMG wheels on the road a couple days ago and nearly steered out of my lane checking it out - it's definitely more impressive in person.

I agree with bimmerjay - I don't think this color / wheels / photo show the car very well (no offense Karl, if you're the photographer). Still, I'm a MB fan and this car doesn't do much for me. When this page first loaded on my screen "awkward Korean knockoff of 90s Lincoln Mark VIII (?)" is what came to mind. On the other hand I saw a silvery gray Bentley Continental GT just yesterday in late afternoon sunlight....just stunning, I stopped to stare. And, some of the people I was with who don't usually notice one car from the next were buzzing about it. I don't think they would have even seen this Benz sitting there. I think the Bentley is one of those cars that comes along occaisionally that is just phenomenal and will stay that way into the future. I have no doubt which one I would choose.

I was under the impression one needs at least $300,000 for a Bentley! Isn't Bentley in the same league as Rolls Royce?
  
This reminds me of an article on the SMART STRATEGIES FOR SMART CAR BUYERS blog, also on edmunds.com, where the topic was about how Lexus, Infinityy and Acura are almost as good as equivalent Benz, BMWs and Audis but are considerably cheaper. Same issue here. I raised the point that it's about the prestige the car offers and not necessarily value based on features, technology or performance. Although Benz is a great car, I wouldn't buy a Benz that will costs the same as a Bentley!
  
Benz says "rich guy" but Bentley says "ultra-rich, quasi-aristocratic billionaire". There is a big difference.......Bentley has far more prestige, presence and "respect".

The cause of this situation is simple. (mis)Management, coupled with a too-big-for-their-britches mentality has led MB to make some unwise decisions.
 
Anyone who follows automotive news knows I don't need to cite examples.

Rick -- funny you mention the "Korean knock-off" impression. You know what this car's lines make me think?
 
"Giant Acura CL" -- which is ironic considering the similarity of the model names. ;)

I agree Karl...hadn't thought of that but it's probably more accurate. I think I need to futher qualify my "Korean" statement - it might have been more accurate a couple/few years ago when the Kia's and Hyundai's were lifting cues from everywhere and mixing them with some VERY curious design ideas of their own - just plain ugly right out of the box IMO. Now, thankfully, those days seem to be mostly a thing of the past.
  
I got it! How about "Chinese knockoff of an Acura CL"?!?
 
BTW The CL also makes me think of the Accord coupe.....I do hope they build the new one very close to the current concept, it has just a little more personality - no?

Current CL has to be one of the worse redesigns (style-wise) ever. Despite it's "plain" looks, the last gen CL was utterly flawless from every angle- especially the 65 AMG with the gun-metal grey 19"s and V12 Biturbo badge. The front of this new model is terrible, no imagination whatsoever. The rims are horrible on the 600- reminds me off first gen LS400, Acura RL and '96 E320. The taper on the rear end makes the car look whimpy and feminine. The AMG models add a little more spice but they can only make up so much ground. Give me the last generation CL65 skin with the added tech of the '07 model.
 
The Conti GT is about wanting to be seen. I don't like that car's styling at all- if I'm paying $150k, I dont a huge FWD overhang. I think people get excited simply because it's a Bently.

Agreed Rick, but after thinking the concept Accord (sedan and coupe) looked quite good the latest spy shots look quite tame (okay, downright boring). I hope Honda doesn't pull back from what were very attractive concept designs...but they have a bad habit of watering down their final production cars. Someone in that design department is obviously quite concerned about the slightest possibility of offending somone. Maybe the test mules were designed to just make us think Honda was going ultra-conservative (again). Let's all hope creativity wins in the end.

And SuperReliable, for a change? Most Merceces still do poorly in the surveys I have read. Does anyone know if there has been any improvement for this brand?

My sense is that they've been on the upswing since bottoming out around 2000-2001. The beating they've taken in various quality surveys hasn't been lost of M-B and they've specifically focused on it. And remember, a lot of those surveys don't distinguish between "car stranded me on side of road" and "can't figure out how to set the clock" in terms of "initial quality complaints." The latest Mercedes-Benz models (and BMWs) have upped the complexity of formerly simple actions, thus leading to an increase in "initial quality complaints" that don't really have to do with "quality." But, there were some valid quality complaints of Mercedes relating to electronic gremlins and such in the past. I think these have been largely (or at least somewhat) addressed in recent years.

While I agree that the details of these "problems" are often a little fuzzy (and I am hardly a believer in CR), the bottom line is MB should be held to the same standards as other brands that do poorly in CR or JD Power. I never hear people making excuses for all the domestic brands that do terribly in CR by saying that people just cant figure out how to work the radio or set the clock so it doesnt fly for MB either. If Lexus, Infiniti, Acura, etc. can put lots of electronic gimmicks in their cars and still acheive good ratings than MB should be able to do so as well.