Discussion in 'Mopar / FCA News' started by Dave Z, Jan 27, 2016.
I would love to see the same but at the same time knowing whats coming will be even better so....
What would be different from the current 200? At least it would be a better car....
There is a HUGE difference between treating an entire car line as a "loss leader", or making a very specific model version as a loss leader or a halo. Don't turn the conversation into something different.
Hellcat is a great example of a halo model with lower production that is PROFITABLE and helps trickle down to other models.
Having one low priced version of a car to be able to advertise $15,999 in tv ads certainly gets people in the door and gets them to potentially buy more profitable versions of that same car.
I don't think any manufacturer, especially one with limited capacity, should use that capacity to build and entire model of 100k-200k+ vehicles that don't make profit.
No one is debating that people don't buy these commodity cars. Buying doesn't matter, profit does, especially when you are capacity constrained.
Matter of opinion. Love my 200C with the 3.6.
I'd like to see a lighter weight Dart getting at least 40 mpg consistently, with a newer engine. I'd take 200 hp or even a little less. But mainly I want high gas mileage and durability.
I thought the Stratus was highly profitable as well. I remember when they compared the Stratus and Contour, the Dodge was a good seller and highly profitable while the Contour was a slower sell and little profit.
What has changed since. Why can't FCA build a highly profitable compact car like Chrysler Corp. did the Neon?
I don't have the numbers here, but Ford spent a lot more money to develop the Contour than Chrysler did on the Cloud Cars.
Yes, I would like to see something like the Aero package, however make it so there is a base model fuel economy model and a luxury fuel economy model. People who are buying the Dart for a daily highway car shouldn't have to choose for a value package for fuel economy. Also a performance lineup is a must for the car. I really don't care for a Focus RS fighter, even though there has been constant teasing of the SRT AWD model. I would at least think a Focus ST model would be a must for the compact car of a performance brand.
If I could do anything to the Dart to make it competitive, like I said before I would give it new front and rear styling, upgrade the infotainment package, fix the front seats, and give it the 9-speed automatic. I would bring the Ottimo body style over from China so it would offer more choices for buyers. There is no reason with Cruze now offering a hatch over here next year and Focus already offering a hatch model, it would probably boost sales by 12% to 24% like those cars get from offering hatchback models. Look at the models it is going up against, the Ottimo styling would be a great fit. Something like the Fiat Ottimo Cross model could be a great Subaru crossover fighter as well.
people got used being giving cars in the excess capacity cash flow days.... now they want the same as consumer not realizing that it darn near killed the company (literally days away)
Different time, different size company..... now every car produced has to pay for that past company size... also depends on where that money was accounted for in the past.. They had capacity and had to have that be productive asset at the time.... also the market has moved since them actually helped along buy one of the original CUVs the PT Cruiser..... they did some tremendous cost saving thingz in the original neon... that now would just be painted as cheap #rap.
And I don't think the Contour/Mistake were as successful as the Cloud Cars were.
Makes alot of sense.
At the time, it was widely reported that they sunk 6 billion into the Contour worldwide.
You could Moparize a Camry and it still wouldn't sell as well.
I said the exact think before. Take a Camry and put Chrysler badges on it and CR will find everything wrong with it.
How about a Toyota badge on a 200? Bet CR would drool all over the car and it would sell like hotcakes.
This is too true. Bob Lutz wrote in one of his books that the Corolla got much better marks than the Nova...even though they were built in the same California factory.
The Contour and Mercury version sold much better than the cloud cars, but the cloud cars made a much larger profit, as you said, and cost less than half as much to create.
While I agree it wouldn't sell as well, I maintain it has much to do with the overall dealer experience as well. For the most part you could take two identical cars, have the same problem and I'd bet overall the Toyota dealer experience would be much better then the FCA dealer.
I think the dealer experience is probably the most under-rated and most-overlooked aspect to the puzzle. People will pay what they PERCEIVE the value to be for a given item. PERCEPTION of the dealer experience offered by brand is also a key. People perceive that going to Big 3 dealers is the traditional "used car sales" experience of yore. For some reason they don't feel the same way about Toyota or Honda, despite the fact that I've gotten worse treatment and more suspect sales people in my dealings there (my parents own a Toyota and I've helped friends negotiate cars).
I'm not sure the Toyota service experience is any better. I had a relative who had a Prius and they asked me to go with them, both when the car was leased and when it was serviced because they aren't car people.
The purchase (actually lease) probably took about 4 hours. They tried to undervalue the trade, kept changing numbers, etc. But it was the only day I had to help them. Once the deal was made, they prepped the car (a poor wash job, didn't install he radio antenna or the shipping plugs in the floor). That experience was so bad, thy never went back to that dealer.
Then at the first service (5k miles oil change) the service writer screwed up and forgot to put the car in the queue. Then after 2 hours, I asked where it was and they finally found the problem. Then another 1.5 hours went by and they said they had to reflash some modules for a recall or service campaign. They never asked about this or the time it would add. Finally after 4.5 hours (the car had an 8am appointment) the car was ready. But the tech had messed up and sprayed oil all over the engine. Smoke started rolling of the car as soon as we pulled out of the lot. Back it went, I told them I wasn't sitting there any longer and they needed to give my relatives and me a loaner car while they fixed this mess. So we left in a rental. Finally at 4:30 the car was done. So from 8AM to 4:30PM for an oil change. The car was o full of rattles and brake noise the dealer had no interest in resolving those issues. They put up with the car for the two year lease and are no longer driving a Toyota.
But yet, I watched the others in the service waiting area with the blank stares when someone came up to them and said X, y and Z needed repaired. The customers just said yes. And this was on top of the mileage based services they were already paying a lot of money for.