NewsThis really is the 2018 Wrangler “JL” • Red vs black keys: Real-world Hellcat performance • Windsor loses Transport

Hello, Allpar Forums member or visitor! If you were a member, you would not see this ad!

Register or log in at the top right of the page...

  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

AN: Does Marchionne grasp lessons of GM-PSA?

Discussion in 'Mopar News and Rumors' started by aldo90731, Mar 13, 2017.

  1. Erik Latranyi

    Erik Latranyi Well-Known Member Level III Supporter

    Likes:
    7,671
    This is what I never understood by the decision to eliminate the Dart/200. They could have shared a plant along with a Chrysler CUV or for extra Cherokee capacity. But they did not just abandon the compact and midsize sedan market, they RAN from it like sharing was not possible.
     
    Last edited: Mar 15, 2017
  2. valiant67

    valiant67 Rich Corinthian Leather Level III Supporter

    Likes:
    8,625
    I have studied and have found that while demand for midsize cars has dropped significantly, compact cars have not seen such a steep drop. And for the manufacturers that can build a quality small car, there's even been sales growth!
    I'm looking across the market and can't find another auto manufacturer where the CEO had a fit and dropped compact and midsize cars from the lineup. This was not an either/or situation, sadly, but that's how Sergio presented it and his fans have all fallen in line to spout that reasoning.
     
    JavelinAMX and aldo90731 like this.
  3. Alexbucks

    Alexbucks Member

    Likes:
    126
  4. Alexbucks

    Alexbucks Member

    Likes:
    126
    You stated Toluca, but the X factor is Compass production.
     
  5. Alexbucks

    Alexbucks Member

    Likes:
    126
    Base on statements, Daimler/Cerberus had no real plans to make Warren a Flex plant.
    Base on GM's version of Flex, the plant has to entire shut down for a year. Hence why only small amounts of GM's plants are True Flex (Spring Hill,Oshawa,Lansing Delta Township (Township was built brand new as Flex) ).
     
    Last edited: Mar 15, 2017
  6. valiant67

    valiant67 Rich Corinthian Leather Level III Supporter

    Likes:
    8,625
  7. Erik Latranyi

    Erik Latranyi Well-Known Member Level III Supporter

    Likes:
    7,671
    GM does not use FLEX.

    Cerberus was not in control for long enough to make any changes to assembly plants.

    Daimler embraced FLEX fully and profited handsomely as a result.
     
  8. Alexbucks

    Alexbucks Member

    Likes:
    126
    Only in your mind does it not negate, as both GM, Chrysler are historical weaker in the U.S. Passenger Car market.
    In fact Mary Barra stated last week during the Opel Sale conference call with Wall Street , that Chverolet in U.S. Passenger Card with Opel suffers from "Weak Franchise Value", while China,Autonomous, Chevrolet Trucks/SUVS and GMC have "Strong Franchise Value".
    GM resources will be spent on "Strong Franchise Value" businesses within GM portfolio.
     
    Prabhjot likes this.
  9. Dave Z

    Dave Z It's me, Dave Staff Member Supporter

    Likes:
    12,860
    FWIW, I suspect warranty claims were one reason for dropping the Dart, ... that and JD Power/CR ratings... there were problems and it would be foolish to deny them. We're at the point where you don't need a lot of problems, or cars stuck on the side of the road, to come in last in quality ratings. Low profits, warranty issues, lousy reviews... I can see the reasons.
     
    Citation84 and jimboy like this.
  10. valiant67

    valiant67 Rich Corinthian Leather Level III Supporter

    Likes:
    8,625
    "Those who do not study history are doomed to repeat it."
    GM and FCA are weak in passenger cars for the reasons everyone denies, mainly quality and consistency.
    Those same systemic issues are present in the CUV market. With the glut of upcoming CUV models all FCA has going for it is the history of the Jeep name. We've already seen the victors in the sedan markets getting substantial results in the CUV markets. GM and FCA's "Weak Franchise Value" in the car markets IS NOT because of the shift to CUVs. It's because of poor past products in the car markets. FCA is doing nothing to keep from repeating the same performance in the CUV market that happened in the CUV market. Quality (as evidenced by any number or surveys and high recall levels) is not something they are seriously striving for.
    FCA hasn't shown an ability to sell a CUV in North America without the Jeep name on it. If they lose Jeep's cachet, it's all over.
     
  11. Alexbucks

    Alexbucks Member

    Likes:
    126
    Daimler base on Warren didn't, and Cerberus gutted Maintenance (confirmed by both GM and Fiat).
     
  12. Erik Latranyi

    Erik Latranyi Well-Known Member Level III Supporter

    Likes:
    7,671
    GM knows nothing about Cerberus.

    Daimler cut maintenance and Cerberus, who inherited the mess, continued cost cutting as the company was bleeding. If Cerberus did not cut, then Marchionne would have when he took control.....this is something many refuse to acknowledge.

    Maintenance has nothing to do with this discussion. You are dancing around a subject you know very little about.
     
    Citation84, JavelinAMX and valiant67 like this.
  13. Prabhjot

    Prabhjot Member

    Likes:
    959
    The cars=sedans in the compact or midsize segment can be imported-in (e.g., Dodge neon=Fiat Tipo) at short-enough notice. Not that they're in any way needed, given the heavy, unrelenting and irreversible shift to compact and midsized CUVs across the board, not just for fca brands.

    FCA offers the Renegade and the new Compass, plus the 500X plus the current=old=inexpensive Journey.

    It could be that FCA, far from having maxed out at its collective marketshare in mass market cuv-s and suv-s can actually grow it substantially: via not just the high-brand-equity Jeeps but also the upcoming Dodge Giorgio d-cuv and one or is that 2 Chrysler cuv-s? They seem to think there's still some runway left in the cuv space, and why would one doubt it, given the HUGE sales of each of cr-v, pilot, rav4, escape, treverse, tucson, rogue etc etc.

    Besides: maybe 1 Alfa Giulia (i.e., a smallish sedan with future Dodge 'avatars') will make more money than who knows? but i want to say arbitrarily an infinite number of incentive-ridden, fleet-sale-ridden, loss making Darts and C200's.

    Those cars should, if at all offered, have been setup to've been manufactured in Mexico or Turkey or Serbia. Their cost structure, given the absence of export volumes (under say the Lancia or Alfa brands in Europe?) to supplement the destined to be dim usa+canada-only volumes: was 'uneconomical'. They were clearly invested in out of political and legal entailments, although why the C200 was not a crossover instead, made alongside the cusw Cherokee is an obvious grave and expensive error? Given that the refreshed Cherokee will indeed apparently have a Chrysler-badged (7-seat?) cuv built alongside it in 2018, is it?

    imo, given multibrand dealerships and given the commitment to clear and focuused (or nothing! since it loses money otherwise given over competition and commoditization, incentives etc) brand-'identities' as well MOPAR history/legacy why either Dodge or Chrysler need(ed) mass market, ultra-affordable all-new smaller fwd sedans is still entirely unclear imo.
     
    Alexbucks likes this.
  14. Alexbucks

    Alexbucks Member

    Likes:
    126
    Nobody here denies quality problems, that not even the point of this thread, and Jeep is a whole another thread( and one that may lead to a" SmackDown" being layed) . But the common theme from both Sergio and Mary is not putting "Good Money after Proven Bad".
     
    Prabhjot likes this.
  15. aldo90731

    aldo90731 Active Member Level III Supporter

    Likes:
    5,783
    I have studied the market more than you know, and have consulted automakers on this topic many times.

    I suggest you study what happened to Chrysler before the bankruptcy, and what the "experts" accused Chrysler of doing after the fact.

    The key difference this time is CUVs may be better prepared to withstand an economic downturn given their fuel efficiency. Having said that, there's no data yet if consumers will flee trucks to embrace cars once again, like they have done many downturns before, or if this time they will stick with CUVs. At this point, it is anyone's guess. Which means SM doesn't know either, but he already killed FCA's car business in North America, effectively leaving nothing for consumers to buy from FCA were they to swing back to cars like in previous cycles.

    As the saying goes: the more things change, the more they stay the same.