If you’ve had your ear to the ground in the automotive world lately, chances are you’ve heard a thing or two about the upcoming Cadillac ATS. The car is supposed to be a smaller, more economical, entry-level Cadillac, designed to fill the slot the CTS outgrew a few years back. The concept version of the car is supposed to debut later this year, likely at the Los Angeles Auto Show, and if we swallow the rumors hook, line and sinker, we’ll probably see a wagon, convertible and coupe version over the next few years. But General Motors has tried its hand at a small Cadillac in the past with next to zero success. Here’s what the company can learn from those mistakes.

The most recent small Cadillac was the Catera, and the car was essentially a rebadged Opel Omega. The problem was, instead of improving on the Omega’s recipe, GM simply added extra weight and softer springs. The result was a low-quality car that accelerated poorly, handled even worse and looked like it shared sheet metal with the economical Saturn SL1. To say buyers greeted the car with apathy would be an insult to apathetic people everywhere. The Catera hit showrooms in 1997 and was swiftly shown the door 2001.

But that wasn’t the first time GM attempted to turn lead into gold. That honor goes to the Cadillac Cimarron. For readers unfortunate enough to remember the GM J-Body cars, the Cimarron needs no introduction. The car got its bones from the likes of the Chevrolet Cavalier in 1981, and under the hood, buyers initially had the option of a 1.8-liter 4-cylinder engine with about as much power as an asthmatic fly. Eventually GM offered a slightly more robust 2.8-liter V6. Though it wasn’t enough to persuade buyers to pay nearly double for what was nothing more than economy car with a Cadillac badge.

So what can GM learn from those models? Simple: Buyers aren’t stupid. Just because the marketing team calls it a Cadillac doesn’t mean the car is worthy of carrying the crest, and consumers know it. If the company wants the upcoming ATS to be a success, it needs to be its own car from the ground up, not some rebadged parts-bin effort. It needs to have plenty of power, handle as well as equivalent models from BMW and Mercedes-Benz and carry a price tag worth paying. It’s a recipe that cars like the CTS-V have followed to the letter, and much to their benefit. Whether the ATS can follow suit remains to be seen.