Moving Chrysler Upscale?!?!
Today I would like to discuss the perceived image of Chrysler by comparing the vehicles that Chrysler produces to other luxury or near-luxury brands.
Below are the vehicles, along with Chrysler, made by Mercury, Buick, Acura, Lincoln, Infinity, Lexus, and Cadillac. Along with the vehicles I have placed the starting MSRP for the various trim levels offered (this may or may not be a complete list of start MSRPs).
For comparison’s sake, I have also averaged all of the starting MSRPs from each of the vehicles (since the list this may not be complete take the average price, as I stated above, take this average price with a grain of salt). Starting with the lowest average price I have listed the manufacturer along with their vehicles. I have also placed in bold the cheapest and most expensive starting MSRPs just for easy comparison sake.
I have also put the sales, for each of the brands, for the first 4 months of 2006. Numbers obtained by posts from hemidakota.
Mercury (6 models, 3 cars, 2 SUVs, 1 minivan):
Milan $18,995
Montego $25,130
Grand Marquis $25,555
Mariner $21,995 - $29,840
Mountaineer $29,795
Monterey $29,325
Average price $25,663
Sales 68,014
Buick (5 models, 2 cars, 2 SUVs, 1 minivan):
LaCrosse $22,490 - $27,990
Lucerne $25,990 - $34,990
Rendezvous $24,990 - $28,990
Rainier $31,290
Terraza $27,990 - $30,490
Average price $28,357
Sales 81,845
Chrysler (6 models, 4 cars, 1 SUV, 1 minivan):
PT $15,125 - $29,850
Sebring $20,730 - $29,595
300 $24,450 - $42,695
Crossfire $30,070 - $50,395
Pacifica $26,145 - $38,755
Town & Country $21,985 - $37,655
Average price $30,621
Sales 214,867
Acura (5 models, 4 cars, 1 SUV):
RSX $20,325
TSX $27,890
TL $33,325
RL $49,300
MDX $37,125
Average price $33,593
Sales 65,023
Lincoln (6 models, 3 cars, 2 SUVs, 1 truck):
Zephyr $29,660
LS $39,945
Town Car $42,875
Mark LT $39,555
Aviator $41,400
Navigator $50,145
Average price $40,597
Sales 42,571
Infinity (5 models, 3 cars, 2 SUVs):
G $31,200 - $33,200
M $40,840
Q $58,100
FX $37,800
QX $49,800
Average price $41,824
Sales 38,805
Lexus (8 models, 5 cars, 3 SUVs):
IS $30,580 - $36,030
ES $33,865
GS $43,845 - $55,595
LS $57,220
SC $66,050
RX $38,095 - $46,755
GX $47,330
LX $68,090
Average price $47,587
Sales 93,056
Cadillac (7 models, 4 cars, 2 SUVs, 1 truck):
CTS $29,990 - $51,395
STS $41,470 - $77,090
DTS $41,990
XLR $77,295 - $100,000
SRX $36,990
Escalade $57,280 - $59,680
Escalade EXT $54,210
Average price $57,036
Sales 68,845
The average “Average price” for the 8 different brands is $38,160 +/- $9,965. Chrysler, which has an average price of $30,621, actually comes in within one standard deviation of the rest of the manufacturers. However it still is roughly $7,500 away from the average starting MSRP of the rest of the manufacturers. Therefore, from this info, one could say that Chrysler could be thought as near luxury and not a luxury brand. Brands that are at or above this price point are Lincoln, Infinity, Lexus, and Cadillac. Missing the boat are Mercury, Buick, Chrysler, and Acura. (Is this division of brands a surprise to you…for some reason it does not surprise me.)
The average number of models of these 8 manufacturers is 6 +/- 1. Chrysler who makes 6 different models is right on average.
The average number of cars is 3.5 cars +/- 0.86. Chrysler who makes 4 different cars also fits into this average.
The average number of SUVs is 1.875 +/- 0.6. Chrysler, who only has 1 SUV the Pacifica, is outside the standard deviation for this particular grouping. With the addition of the Aspen, this will help bring Chrysler inline with the rest of the industry. (Note: all crossovers or anything as such has been classified as an SUV).
The average number of minivans is 0.375 + 0.48 - 0.375. The brands which carry minivans are only Mercury, Buick, and Chrysler. They also happen to have the lowest average start MSRP prices…any thoughts why this is so???
The average number of trucks is 0.25 + 0.43 - 0.25. The brands that carry trucks in their lineups are Cadillac and Lincoln. One a clone of the F-series and the other a clone of the Avalanche. They are both asking around or more than $40,000 for them…is this something or a market that Chrysler needs to get into? The pimped out/chromed out truck? A Chrysler version of the Dodge Ram anyone? The Chrysler Citadel?
The average sales for the first 4 months of 2006 for the given 8 brands is 84,128 +/- 52,222 units. Chrysler, which sells the most cars in this grouping of brands, sells more vehicles by 2.5 standard deviations then the average. Chrysler alone with Lexus are the only 2 brands that are above the average mark. (This tells me I should be using other forms of statistics…but I am too lazy for that). Chrysler also outsells the next leading brand, Lexus, by 120,000 units which is more units then even Lexus has sold. Does this mean that Chrysler is the best near luxury brand or is it a slow selling general brand á la Chevy, Ford, Honda, Dodge, Toyota, and Nissan?
Being DCX’s armchair CEO, this is my plan for moving Chrysler upscale:
1. Get rid of the PT. It is the lowest price vehicle from all 8 brands and with many Chrysler/Jeep dealers and with the addition of the Compass and Patriot to the Jeep brand there is no reason to have a low priced vehicle in the Chrysler lineup. The PT can be moved to the Dodge brand (they may or may not keep the grill) since the Dodge brand is the only mass-market brand in the DCX lineup (that is all I will say on that).
2. Get rid of lower trim levels of the 300. That means getting rid of the base with the 2.7L and the Touring edition with the 3.5. Keep the 300 on par with the Avalon in terms of beginning price range say $29,995 starting price point well equipped.
3. Keep the starting price point of the next Sebring at $20,000. And I mean 20k, not a starting MSRP at 20k with 5k dollars worth of rebates. If you want to roll with the big boys then you need to walk and talk like you’ve got it.
4. Include the Aspen to the line up. This is going to happen so nuff said.
5. The next generation Pacifica should be able to go toe to toe with the FX, RX, MDX, and MKX. Engine, price point, no base models, lower sales expectations, and don’t call it something that has an X in it.
6. Get rid of the Crossfire and replace it with the Chrysler engineered Firepower. Add the Hemi and have a starting MSRP of 45K for it. This will be on par with some trim levles of the Crossfire, but this time worth the money, IMO.
7. Don’t produce a Chrysler truck á la Mark LT. Who buys $40,000 trucks anyway?
8. Keep the minivan. Although most of the luxury or near luxury brands do not offer this particular type of vehicle…it will be able to set Chrysler apart from the rest. Minivan doesn’t mean cheap and hopefully the next T&C will show people this. Oh, did I say no base models…that is what ***cough cough*** Dodge is for.
9. Interior, interiors, and interiors. All interiors of Chrysler vehicles should meet the standards set the the above 7 other brands. Go and take a drive in a Lucerne or a Mountaineer just for starters. They all, for the most part, have really nice interiors. Most people at allpar say they love the interiors of say the 300, well most of us at allpar would buy a garbage can with 4 wheels and a Chrysler badge on it….just like the general public would buy the same with a Toyota badge owwww ahhhhhhh.
So those are my 9 suggestions for moving Chrysler up-market and upscale. Along with my suggestions I have also place some statistics to try and back up some of my points and why some of these changes needs to be accomplished.
Any thoughts, any suggestions???
This guy is nuts!!!! The PT is an icon! And Chrysler is one of the “Big 3″ (well it used to be and I still consider it is) and with saying that, Chrysler needs a few nice low priced cars. And they should re think the crossfire to go head on with the Solstice/Sky, still bring the Firepower to compete with the Corvette, keep the Aspen, and keep the cheap trim levels on all cars so people will continue to buy the cars, If they go up on the 300 I won’t even consider getting one in the future. Chrysler needs to stay where they are at, except just expand..not cut.
Amen! Particularly the part about the 300. If we’re cashing in on heritage here, the 300 should NOT have entry-level models! (Brings to mind 1962, when they brought out the non-letter 300 to replace the Windsor! They sold a lot of them, but look what it did to the 300’s image!) Make the 5.7 the standard engine, and do away with the base version, the Touring and the Limited. Let the only upgrade be to the 6.1 SRT-8. Then give us an Imperial - a proper Imperial like the concept currently on the car show circuit. If they’ll do that, the sales figures may fall initially, but the image will be polished, and image can have wondrous effects on sales, particularly among those with the money to buy “image”.
PT, I agree, almost! Seperate the PT into a line of it’s own. I believe that MT had a wish list of PT models one time that included an extended wb minivan and a small pickup. Sell as PT by Chrysler with references back to the old Plymouth line. You’re on the rightt track with everything else.
I’m nuts…well at least I got some comments and that is what I am really going for.
Thanks everyone for the comments…good or bad are always welcomed.
Yes, Chrysler still a part of the big three (Chrysler meaning Chrysler, Dodge, and Jeep) and none of these brands are nowhere near a luxury brand.
The PT, as we all know, was intended to be a Plymouth. It was never intended to be a Chrysler. A $15,000 PT hurts the overall image of Chrysler. Items like the ME412 or the Imperial will not command a higher starting MSRP with the PT, as well as the lower trim levels of the other vehicles that Chrysler produces, on the dealers lots.
I didn’t want to say it in the blog, but DCX either needs to bring back Plymouth, or as Wayne suggested start a new line of vehicles ala PT or Personal Transportation.
Sometimes you have to break down walls in order to build a new and better one. By completing the points that I stated above…Chrysler could be, one day, thought as on the same playing field with Lexus and Cadillac. Instead it is on a course with no direction…with some cutting and rebuilding it could become a major player.
Heartily agreed!
Hats OFF!! Good read, good insight, great ideas. Here, here!
I couldn’t have said it better. Eliminating the base models will reduce overlap with Dodge and move Chrysler upscale. The Town & Country should start in the high $20K range, like the (admittedly poor selling) Buick and Mercury vans. The new Sebring should base at no less than $20K, and should have a V6 (at least a turbo 4) as standard. The 2.7L 300 model is inexcusable.
While the PT Cruiser has been a tremendous sales success, it is too cheap for an upscale brand. If I had my choice, I’d drop it as soon as possible. Hopefully the Aspen, as well as the Firepower and (a toned down) Imperial, will help improve the brand image should they ever make it to market.
Some other short term solutions:
1) No more bolt-on wheelcovers, for the love of God. The base Sebring sedan has aluminum wheels, why can’t the base 300, Pacifica, or Town & Country?
2) Replace the 4 speed automatic with more advanced transmissions as soon as possible (this goes for all of their brands).
3) Improve marketing and dealer training efforts.
One other note: it was recently announced that Acura will drop the RSX after the 2006 model year, leaving that market to the Civic Si. This move will raise Acura’s average MSRP to $36,910, at least until the RDX and a decontented RL show up. Here’s hoping Chrysler will follow the Acura model and phase out the PT! If it had been a Plymouth as was originally intended, we would’t be having this problem today.
I was going to mention the RSX today…you beat me to the punch.
Put the point is still well made.
Even thou Acura will be getting rid of an extremely well selling car…they are thinking about the future.
Thanks for the comments.
This guy is a loon. Thats sure what customers want today for us to raise prices.
Why not just make everything start out at $30000. Hey no wait if $30000 is good how about $40???
Wouldnt that be better???
Well, yes, it WOULD be better. Sometimes people want to pay more for a car. if you want to have a luxury brand, you have to charge luxury prices. There’s no point it claiming Chrysler is luxury or near-luxury when its price range is more Chevrolet than Cadillac. Besides if they charged more (and got it), they could ouyt more in. Let the PT go free, and forget about the Chrysler Sebring (I know, it’s too late to stop that mistake), and you have a Chrysler that means something - not just Plymouth with a fancy logo.
The question is JBauer is how does one or a company construct or build a luxury brand?
Toyota did it with Lexus, Honda with Acura, and Nissan with Infinity.
All of these brands came out of nowhere and the asking prices are much higher then their “bread-and-butter” brands.
What I am saying is that IF (remember the big if) DCX wants to move Chrysler upscale like Acura, Lexus, etc. then this is what they have to do.
IF DCX wants Chrysler to be perceived as a Dodge, Chevy, Ford, Nissan, etc. then they should continue what they are doing.
Does that help you understand the point of what I am trying to get across?
No more comments…I was wondering what Rich had to say about things.
Rich, Rich are you there???
This just sounds like another argument to bring back plymouth, send the pt and base models to plymouth, so chrysler can stay upscale, no?
everything you say tells me that that is why plymouth was around now with 2 brands you have to much to cover,is dodge economy or performance, the more I hear the more I say where is Plymouth, if it was around you would not have a problem where to put the PT cruiser.
Sure in general XJ that is what is going on.
But to further comment on your comment along with geraldg’s comment.
The Chrysler Group doesn’t really need Plymouth to move upscale.
They are just trying to be all things for everyone.
Cut the fat and if they want to sell cars for 13k or 15k, then ya, bring back Plymouth.
But for fun…I will make sure to have my next blog stating that the CG doesn’t need Plymouth.
I think that will be interesting topic :)
When Chrysler tried to move the Imperial upscale..into it’s own brand…it just
did not work. When someone decided to move the Chrysler line upscale a few years
back we got the Chrysler Pacifica.
Now amid a struggling minivan market with fierce
competion..lets divide our minivan buyers and expand our options or even rebadge them
as VW’s and compete with ourselves!
We have been successful as a niche manufacturer…that is not a sin, it is success!
We have been successful with listening to our customer’s and giving them what they want. Be proud!
We have been successful by being consistent, and that has kept us going where others have failed!
While it is a great goal to dream of bigger and better things, do not forget what has worked.
In a tough world economy, difficult market condtions will reward the slow and steady. Experiments
in economics ruin companies, business, and customer relations faster than you can recover…ehem,
GM & FORD or even the old Chrysler who needed a timely bailout.
Stick with what works…give our consumers what they want..then make it better so they come back
again, and again (minivan model!) Always leave them wanting a little more, then deliver it!
Be the best..in our area, our arena! Bright ideas like these have brought us things like the missing
Ram Vans…the Sprinter vans that replaced them…and, oh yeah…my LOST customer’s because “I was
not awarded a franchise.” There was 15 years of effort…lost in 6 months along with my chassis cab
business!
Remember #1 in truck sales before the F-series??? It was Dodge! We walked away from a strong truck
business in the 70’s…just gave it to Ford…and the rest is a history lesson!
Aspirations are great…just don’t take the whole industry down the drain when you decide
to experiment with our business, customers and economy!
Just to be clear…I believe in our business and products. I believe in our customer’s and
our employees to make the difference. I just worry about misteps that could, in difficult
times be worse than they should be under normal economic models. Mis-steps by those who have
ideas but no trench warfare experience…you need to know when to attack, when to re-treat and
when hold your ground!
You have pointed out some good points manager.
Moving Chrysler upscale isn’t going to happen over night…see the intro of the Pacifica as evidence.
People aren’t going to pay for 40k for a Pacifica when there are 15k PT’s on the lot.
You need to break the walls before you can build up. Get rid of the cheap trim levels and then you can begin to charge more for other new cars.
I am very sorry to hear about your lost buisness…but why is it that Toyota, Nissan, Honda, GM, Ford, VW, and now Hyundai all can develope profitable luxury brand.
Is it that Chrysler is cursed? Everyone else can do it except for the CG??
Luxury is good, look at Porshe…the most profitable automanufacture out there in the world.
As a shareholder…I would like a near luxury division slotted in between Chrysler and Benz.
Either create a brand out of thin air or push Chrysler upmarket.
You can’t fit a luxury division between Chrysler and Benz. They’re already close together and nearly overlapping. Besides, we’ll just end up with base model Benzes.
I’ve been arguing with minivans that the key is to avoid the same problems that led to Chrysler losing the truck and van markets … that is, complancy and not providing anything unique. If Chrysler makes a minivan that is identical to a Toyota, I’d bet 80% of buyers will buy the Toyota. Chrysler’s reputation on the street is mud and that will only change with time.
I don’t think they should relaunch Imperial. I don’t recall Imperial ever working and it invariably was bean-countered.
Manager, are you suggesting that Chrysler should stay in the Plymouth position (despite never having as many sales as Plymouth)? Or maybe try to inch upwards while still staying on the entry level, despite the fact that no automaker in the US has ever been able to cover both entry level and luxury? (Maybe Hyundai will be the first. I suspect they’ll soon launch a Korean luxury brand, though.)
Or maybe Chrysler should try the ostrich approach yet again, importing cars for the entry level and sticking ot the profitable upper end of the market. That worked in the 1970s, with Cricket and Colt and Champ and Challenger, right? And in the 1980s, with Colt and Horizon, and in the 1990s, with Colt. Only problem is, the buyers don’t grow up to buy Chryslers, they grow up to buy Mitsus and Toyotas because someone tells them along the way that their great first car is actually Japanese. Meanwhile, Chrysler ends up without fuel efficient cars when gas is in short supply or expensive, and yup, more customers gone.
Part of the problem with Chrysler is lousy dealers - same as Plymouth, but more visible. You can’t make a luxury brand with high-pressure, loudmouth salespeople and service people who act like the “guy from Brooklyn” in old war movies. They should have killed the Chrysler brand and kept Plymouth, and then after a while rebuilt the Chrylser brand - or Imperial to replace it - with a brand new dealer contract specifying service levels, loaner cars, no-haggle pricing, etc. But no, they killed off a popular brand so they could pretend that Chryselr is growing quickly - well, duh, with all those Town & Countrys and PT Cruisers, of courses it’s growing. But when a Town & Country is really a Plymouth Voyager, Chrysler’s cheapest minivan, how is Chrysler supposed to be a luxury brand? If I want to impress my neighbors, I sure as **** won’t buy a Chrysler.
The problem with selling luxury vehicles is the limited market. We have thousands of employees
building a really great product… at all levels. We need to keep that line moving. We need
the Dodge division to get the mustang killer in production (Hello??Challenger…) Jeep had it’s
market established, but alas I fear diluting it with new product (I think the AWD Subaru killer
called compass is great, but two liberty sized SUV’s-NOT.)
Chrysler has hit the nail on the head…300C, in any configuation is top notch…want to sell more,
then upgrade the goodies or have a price break. Over the last 50 years Chrysler “group” has a
history of doing well and plumeting…on a 7 year cycle! This is the longest, 12 years, that they
have held up in the marketplace. Now is not the time to get ultra gutsy/creative in a shaky market.
Love it as I may, I believe that the death of Plymouth was an acceptable loss. Between the Dodge and
Chrysler Brands that gap can and will be filled. The marketplace will weed out poor dealers by
natural selection and if they do not die…they must have “something” that consumers want…or they
would be dead and dying.
My opinion is this: Chrysler has proven that it can sell a desirable product and cosumers will clamor
for it (Early PT’s, 300’s, Sebring Conv’t to name the most recent) and if they keep the products fresh
and change them out more frequently the desire will stay fresh.
My belief is that the leadership of Chrysler/Dodge/Jeep is no longer listening to the
consumer who has purchased our products and are looking for the same thing yet better, they are looking across the street.
It’s the same old thing-the grass is greener on the other side, yet somebody has to mow the lawn!
What I mean is this, stop watching the other guy. Do for yourself and the customers they have will come
to you. If you copy them, they are the original, not you! Go back to your current customer and ask how
you can keep them with your bussiness…then give them what they want.
Remember Oldsmobile?? They changed to chase the import guy…they gave up the customers that had… all
in one shot! Now they’re gone.
If you keep your 7 million minivan buyers happy…do you need the other 500,000 that bought a Honda? No, but
if you try to build the Honda…you may gain 100,000 of those buyers… at the cost of 2,000,000 of our existing
customers!!!!! Hello!!!! Wake up and try to maintain your current business. In a declining market, maintaining
a base is the same as increasing one!
Would you rather sell 1,000 Imperial/Benz/Luxury level cars or 5,000 mid level sales in the same market?
Would you rather have the trades to resell off the 5,000 deals or the 1,000 deals?
Would you perhaps like to have the service, parts, warranty sales of the 1,000 deals or the 5,000.
Same for service contracts, reserve and after sell. 5,000 or 1,000?
What about advertising? Ave of $200 per or $900 per? You still have to advertise right?
Folks, upscale is great. Luxury is nice. Volume still pays the bills. We need better
product that will keep who we have happy…do that and you can have customers for life. Don’t
do that and you will struggle for “your life.”
My Opinion and .75 cents. With that you can get a candy bar….
Speaking of world hunger…I was thinking………. :)
greener on the other
Hmmm. Good idea. After all, your strategy worked with the B-vans, mid-sized sedans, luxury cars, economy cars, Barracuda, Valiant, and compact pickups, right?
The Comment on May 19, 2006 under Anonymous is my handi-work. I take full
credit for it…good or bad.
“Hmmm. Good idea. After all, your strategy worked with the B-vans, mid-sized sedans, luxury cars, economy cars, Barracuda, Valiant, and compact pickups, right? ”
B-Vans (Needed the Diesel option, and platform upgrade)
Mid-Sized Sedans-Hot at first and not upgraded..eminent death.
Luxury Cars-Where? Until the 300C, An upgraded Dynasty is still a Dynasty.
Economy Cars-Like the rebadged imports? Omni based offspring? Hello!! Upgrade or die!
Barracda (Plymouth?) Valiant-C’mon…
Compact Pickup-Again, rebadge. And the Raider..rebadge.
If you continue to use others as your own… you are still using someone else’s success or failure but
even so it is already in the market place and on it’s way out.
Is there something wrong with the concept here? Updgrade or die? Give them what they want?
Take what has worked and improve it? Kill what is not working? Focus on what works?
Incremental Luxury sales are wonderful..if they are incremental. If you take from one hand and
give to the other that is a compensating balance. No true gain but real losses. The efforts needed
to convince the consumer to change generally came at another areas expense.
I am all for upscale. But not “from one to anther” sales. Show me incremental/additional sales and
how it will work. If you want to “experiment” then work with what you’ve got.
In the mean time, while we are figuring out how to sell the new luxury look of Chrysler, can someone
please tell them to build more Caliber’s??? That happens to be something people do want.
:)
OK. You seem to have bounced across quite a spectrum. Let’s go step by step.
The problem with selling luxury vehicles is the limited market. We have thousands of employees
building a really great product… at all levels. We need to keep that line moving. We need
the Dodge division to get the mustang killer in production (Hello??Challenger…) Jeep had it’s
market established, but alas I fear diluting it with new product (I think the AWD Subaru killer
called compass is great, but two liberty sized SUV’s-NOT.)
Yes, I agree there.
Chrysler has hit the nail on the head…300C, in any configuation is top notch…want to sell more,
then upgrade the goodies or have a price break. Over the last 50 years Chrysler “group” has a
history of doing well and plumeting…on a 7 year cycle! This is the longest, 12 years, that they
have held up in the marketplace. Now is not the time to get ultra gutsy/creative in a shaky market.
Yup
Love it as I may, I believe that the death of Plymouth was an acceptable loss. Between the Dodge and
Chrysler Brands that gap can and will be filled. The marketplace will weed out poor dealers by
natural selection and if they do not die…they must have “something” that consumers want…or they
would be dead and dying.
No, I don’t think it was acceptable, because the gap cannot be filled without losing the market niches Dodge and Chrysler are striving for. There’s a need for a bland Toyota level vehicle and if Dodge is busy chasing bold and brash, and Chrysler is affordable luxury, how are they going to do it? By giving Plymouths Dodge and Chrysler labels. What’s the point in having brands then? Why not just call eveyrthing a Mercedes and get it over with?
My opinion is this: Chrysler has proven that it can sell a desirable product and cosumers will clamor
for it (Early PT’s, 300’s, Sebring Conv’t to name the most recent) and if they keep the products fresh
and change them out more frequently the desire will stay fresh.
Yes. Nobody is arguing.
My belief is that the leadership of Chrysler/Dodge/Jeep is no longer listening to the
consumer who has purchased our products and are looking for the same thing yet better, they are looking across the street. It’s the same old thing-the grass is greener on the other side, yet somebody has to mow the lawn!
Yes, I think we all agree with you, and it’s what Chrylser has always done.
What I mean is this, stop watching the other guy. Do for yourself and the customers they have will come
to you. If you copy them, they are the original, not you! Go back to your current customer and ask how
you can keep them with your bussiness…then give them what they want.
True to a point. Stay true to yourself. Of course that’s what a different blog post comparing to BMW was saying.
Remember Oldsmobile?? They changed to chase the import guy…they gave up the customers that had… all
in one shot! Now they’re gone.
Yes. They weren’t true to their roots. They tried to change their focus suddenly and ended up dead. That’s why we don’t want Chryselr to try to be Plymouth.
If you keep your 7 million minivan buyers happy…do you need the other 500,000 that bought a Honda? No, but
if you try to build the Honda…you may gain 100,000 of those buyers… at the cost of 2,000,000 of our existing
customers!!!!! Hello!!!! Wake up and try to maintain your current business. In a declining market, maintaining
a base is the same as increasing one!
I think this was a slam on my thoughts about making more niche minis - stick-shift, AWD. Well, I wasn’t saying they should drop autaomtics. I was saying that when you sell 400,000 of something a year, or whatever it is, you can do things competitors can’t, which is why you can get the Camry as a Camry, a Solara, a Lexus, a stick-shift, or an automatic with a four or a big six. And a Camry in Lexus trim is very, very far from a Camry in the way that a 300C is not far from a Charger.
Would you rather sell 1,000 Imperial/Benz/Luxury level cars or 5,000 mid level sales in the same market?
Would you rather have the trades to resell off the 5,000 deals or the 1,000 deals?
Would you perhaps like to have the service, parts, warranty sales of the 1,000 deals or the 5,000.
Same for service contracts, reserve and after sell. 5,000 or 1,000?
What about advertising? Ave of $200 per or $900 per? You still have to advertise right?
Thanks, I’d rather sell about 200,000 Hornets.
Folks, upscale is great. Luxury is nice. Volume still pays the bills. We need better product that will keep who we have happy…do that and you can have customers for life. Don’t
do that and you will struggle for “your life.”
Yes, I think that was a lot of the point of the Renth post and I agree. However if you want to keep who you have happy, you will bring back Plymouth, which as a brand that Chrysler ahd been trying to kill for years still had more buyers than most “real” companies.
Thanks Dave for you honest comments, I truly enjoy reading your thoughts, and on some point we agree to disagree.
I would like to balance one point though… you wrote:
“I think this was a slam on my thoughts about making more niche minis - stick-shift, AWD”
I in no way was “slamming” you as your thought here are excellent, on the contrary….I
am slamming those who wish to pay the bills by creating VW income
sales/rebadge/redesign) from using our minivan platform.
To allow them to “compete” with our product is the same as selling them weapons to offset the
cost of war and then they use them on our troops in the trenches. It is short sighted and
another way to dilute our shrinking minivan sales.
Thanks for your input..the banter is great, but unless someone at the top will listen and learn,
it really just makes us feel better.
Keep up the great work!
Oh. Thank you. Yes, I agree. It would be another story for VW to sell Chrysler minivans in Europe. I think the whole VW affair is the result of the freindship between Dieter and Wolfgang, and is not at all good for Chrysler; I think that friendship is why we’ll end up seeing Dodge Hornets that are thinly disguised VW Polos. Chrysler will end up as tuners/stylists for Mercedes on the top and tuners/stylists for Volkswagen everywhere else…as one moron said, “Why not use the Passat instead of the Stratus?”
Here is the deal. You want exclusivity, make less than 20,000 units, add 20-30 K to the price for tooling and 5K for added value items and plan on making profit on an each sale basis. Chrysler built its following on cheap price cars. To change the immage to make them upper class is going to be almost impossible. Near luxury class -Possible. But if Mcdonalds started selling $25 steaks tomarrow who would buy them? If you have a marketing model that works and the product brings loyal customers back, it is suicide to change. Now if they were to reintroduce a luxury brand -(Imperial) or a Chrysler version of the Toyota Lexus Division and differenciate it from the product mix, but just how upscale before you knock on Daimler’areas.
At this point it appears CHRYLSER will be selling VOLKSWAGEN minivans in Europe.
What do you mean by that Dave?
I thought Chrysler was producing VW minivan for the NA market only?
VW makes a minivan for Europe. It was in the news that Chrysler may be adopting that design for their Euro mini sales. Which woudl be odd since they alreayd sell vans there.
Thanks…that is very odd….I wounder what the sales numbers of the VW to DCX minivans are???
Based on my observation ten years ago, the VW greatly outnumbers the Chrysler, but I don’t know if that’s still true and evenif it was true then or just an artifact.