The retuned direction of DCX
Well, there was a lot of interest in the articles I’ve read on Dieter’s reorganization of DCX; the point of which is to ‘remove the hyphen’ that separated “Daimler” from “Chrysler” in the eyes of many inside and outside of the company. It’s true that there was overlap in many functional areas, but to me the biggest statement here was that the little kingdoms that exist (mostly on the Mercedes side of the aisle) are detrimental to the company as a whole. They hinder the advancement of “we” and embolden “us and them”.
I think this is a bold, but needed, step in the right direction. One of the things that has helped the competition forge ahead is the ability to (borrowing a Chrysler marketing term here, forgive me) ‘cut through the clutter’ and prevent mistakes. Organizational clutter, of course, has long been a bugaboo of “Detroit” and of late Mercedes has become fixated by the glittering jewel that is overblown electronics, resulting in quality lapses but no loss of arrogance.
Back when two guys named Dieter and Wolfgang (”Them”) came in to head what used to be Chrysler Corp (”Us”), it really looked like the continuance of the end to many, given the mess that the Chrysler Group was in at the time. The deep cuts that followed looked like the entity was being bled dry. Move ahead in time though and it turns out that the new management was fairly forward-looking given that their neighbors are currently facing the same cuts while Chrysler is in better shape than not only GM and Ford, but the vaunted Mercedes as well. Even more amazing, both Dieter and Wolfgang were able to break down the “us and them” and turn it into “we”. They convinced people that they *cared* about what Chrysler stood for, and about the history. Dieter Zetsche left Detroit as, by far, the most admired local auto chief. The hope was that he would take that with him to Stuttgart. This move gives confidence that he can move DCX forward as a cohesive company.
As someone who was tolling the bell after the takeover was inflicted on us, I have to say I like where they’re going. Competition is tough and only getting tougher. Serious issues lie ahead in terms of advancing hybrid technologies, improving the dealer body and corporate relationships with same, and of course ill advised product landmines must be avoided. But…I’m fairly optimistic in the future of DaimlerChrysler. Without the hyphen.
Wonderful and wonderfully writen article Rich.
Mostly agree - BUT they really cut too far on engineering, and I think when they started the cuts they did not intend to stop them! I think that came later. I understand someone shoved Dieter’s nose into Chrysler history …
I agree they cut too deep. But considering the way things looked shortly after the “merger” I’d say things could certainly be worse. I daresay that if the old CC hadn’t let Plymouth become a ho-hum collection of rebadged Dodges (and a roadster that, while cool, had no connection to the lineup) that they might well have kept it along. People blamed Daimler for pulling the plug but if the patient wasn’t comatose maybe they wouldn’t have. And it all probably goes back to when you started seeing “Chrysler-Plymouth” on the marketing material. Hey, there’s that hyphen again!
Oh, and I agree with Autoextremist that inventory levels are too high, but I’m not quite as worked up about it. Of course I don’t call myself an ‘extremist’ either so….
It still wrangles me that Daimler used subtrefuge and lies to accomplish the “take over.” The patient wasn’t comatose
as the comment indicates except that Robert Eaton was in charge, and he had no intestinal fortitude. He was little
more than a dyed in the wool European. No apologies, they do NOT know what is good for America. The 700 years of making the same mistakes says this is so. Of course, I cannot fathom to this day WHY CC let Plymouth dangle in the wind for
so many years. It was what made the company. The biggest Plymouth advocate left when Walter Chrysler retired, sad it
is to say. Chrysler should have bought Daimler, and if Eaton had any balls they would have. Certainly Daimler was alert to the idea, except Shremmp detected the inherent weakness of Eaton and took advantage, with some help from insiders, of course.
There is an exception. France handled Québec exceptionally well. The seigneurial system lasted peacefully through revolution and conquest and eventually died, as I vaguely recall, in the 20th Century due mainly to the problem of splitting estates into smaller and smaller pieces (a reaction to the obvious problems that developed with primogeniture). Only the best Catholics could go to New France, and the horrible corruption of the royal government was avoided - through a design set up by a notoriously corrupt man, Cardinal Richelieu! So Europeans did handle at least PART of the New World quite well. One may well as what would have happened had England won the 1812 War - no doubt we’d have a whole lot more Amerinds around, since that war was partly fought, according to Canadian/British history at least, to protect the Québec fur trade, which relied on Amerinds in what is now the Midwest. America wanted to clear the Indians and convert the entire area to farms, which, of course, we did.
But yes, I cannot understand why so few at Chrysler Corporation understood the need for Plymouth, or why Dieter, to this day, has not brought it back. They seem to be Plymouth-izing Chrysler, in fact - bringing Chrysler further downmarket even than it was (the 300 can be had with a 2.7, but the Dodge version, the Charger, cannot!), using two Plymouth vehicles (Town & Country and PT), and replacing Plymouth versions with Chrysler versions of Dodge cars.
Had the Dodge Dart A-body never been built, we surely would not be in this shape, but Chrysler is FULL of shooting-self-in-the-foot errors.
Perhaps you could use Quebec as an example, however, I dare say that the sepratist movement is still alive and well in that arena there. Many Quebecians would argue that Quebec needs to be FREE and INDEPENDENT and feel constrained by the laws of Canada proper. I think it is the French blood. Must be something in the water kind of thing.
And I do have to compliment you on the 300 C example to the detriment of the Chrysler brand. Wny doesn’t Dodge have a suitable down market vehicle ala the 2.7 litre engine like the 300? Plymouth could and SHOULD be filling that niche for the entire corporation. Perhaps Dieter isn’t the Chrysler man that some believe he is. I would like to think that with all the new car introductions planned over the next few months that a LOT of them would fill in nicely as a PLYMOUTH!
They just want to separate from Canada purely because they speak a different language.
The other reason is because they are not in our constitution. They refused to sign it becasue a past PM would not say they were a distinct society.
They are just as left as the rest of Canada (minus Alberta).
It is sort of like, you are different from me so I should be scared of you.
It is silly.
How did this come up again?
Well…the patient that was comatose was Plymouth, and I can’t see how it could be viewed as anything less. It was the Prowler, which dealers didn’t know what to do with and didn’t fit the Plymouth mode, the Neon, which was the same as the Dodge (minus the sporty version), the Breeze (same as the Dodge Stratus but decontented) and the Voyager, which did quite well on it’s own. But one vehicle does not a division make. So Plymouth was pretty much an afterthought. They barely even got the Breeze fer cryin’ out loud.
As far as bringing it back now? I think fixing Mercedes is higher on Deiter’s list right now. It’d be quite a bold step indeed, requiring the kind of full blown marketing rollout like we haven’t seen in some time, along with vehicles that aren’t just obvious reskinned Dodges - otherwise, what’s the point? It’d be something to see, for sure. I’m not holding my breath. I’d love to see it, but…
I don’t understand how separatism makes Quebec a failure. I think Chrysler would like to separate from Mercedes, but that doesn’t make Chrysler a failure. Indeed, the continued existence of Québecois culture in the face of conquest and centuries of time with associated technological and religious upheaval makes the success story even more impressive - not to mention the continued success of Quebec’s economy compared to, say, American Indian economies prior to casinos, or Mexico, or (pick a country in South American).
As far as being to the left, (a) left of what? and (b) so? Is success determined by how far you are to the right? And how are we defining “right” and “left”? Better not to get into that.
Plymouth…well, it WAS comatose. The PT Cruiser would have woken it up. Don’t forget, the PT was designed to be the first of many newly restyled Plymouths in the form of the Prowler. Two vehicles can make a moderately successful division…if one is the PT…which at 120,000 per year makes it bigger than some other brands we could mention. Then there’s the Voyager - imagine it restyled - etc.
Plymouth was viewed as comatose, only because the Doctor was on the golf course! How you can argue with a constant sales flow of 200,000 units even under the Benign neglect doctorine practiced by the Chrysler Board. Chrysler Group has NOT found it’s way yet when the niche occupied by Plymouth was abandoned. Dodge will NEVER fulfill that slot, and moving stuff with a Chrysler brand on it into the former Plymouth price range CHEAPENS the line. If Toyota fulfills a market, then a revived Plymouth could do just as well, and probably even better. It was NOT Plymouth’s fault that it was cut loose to stand on its own without any corporate support. Just take a long look at Dodge history and count the number of cars it derived from Plymouth. Then try to argue that Plymouths were just rebadged Dodges. Someone at the top was sleeping. Walter Chrysler’s ghost should have come back and kicked someone squarely in their ass for the decline of the car that made the Chrysler Corporation what it was. And don’t forget in the 30s and 40s, CC was a big number two.