NewsFCA: more profits • New Pacifica trim to hit sweet spot? • Does the Demon stop faster than the Camaro ZL1?

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.

Sergio confirms media went out of context with VW,defends killing Dart,200

Discussion in 'Mopar News and Rumors' started by Alexbucks, Mar 16, 2017.

  1. Alexbucks

    Alexbucks Member

    Likes:
    257
    That 100k number included retire healthcare, in otherwords pre-VEBA.
     
  2. Alexbucks

    Alexbucks Member

    Likes:
    257
    Well that's the key," widely different", and "variants" of components.
     
  3. valiant67

    valiant67 Rich Corinthian Leather Level III Supporter

    Likes:
    8,916
    So to summarize: Alfas can be sold at a loss but Dart and 200 could not. Either that or it's a lie Dodge volume was needed to support Alfa.
     
  4. valiant67

    valiant67 Rich Corinthian Leather Level III Supporter

    Likes:
    8,916
    Which is a minor factor in the cost of manufacturing a car.
     
  5. aldo90731

    aldo90731 Active Member Level III Supporter

    Likes:
    6,066
    Right. Just like unproductive plants can remain open in Italy but not here. Capisce?
     
    jimboy likes this.
  6. MJAB

    MJAB Active Member

    Likes:
    1,869
    Well one can do a discussion if one knows real number, not when one use an hypothetic number as base for his/her assertions.
    Even reading the annual FCA economic-financial public documents that data are not shown.
    An indirect aproximated evaluation can be done, for example, for Maserati since limited lineup, few plants and its data separated from other ones.
     
    Prabhjot likes this.
  7. DAGAR

    DAGAR Member

    Likes:
    700
    Valiant, you are just looking to continue an argument because you don't like the situation. I never said one brand versus another could be sold at a loss. What I said was that it's the total financial picture that drives the decisions. I am also a firm believer that Dodge and Jeep volume will add significant positive cash flow as they start to roll out on the Giorgio platform. I am stating that making the FURTHER investments that would have been needed to have rolled out those models on the original schedule would not have been financial beneficial. The success of LX and GC have allowed them to milk that cow a bit longer without need for exceptionally high rebates or fleet dumps. Never extending Giorgio to actual models from Dodge and Jeep will mean that they ran out of time and money before they got there. Doing it the way they are makes that less likely.
     
  8. DAGAR

    DAGAR Member

    Likes:
    700
    Blame the Italian government if you want - I'm sure FCA is as frustrated with that as anyone.
     
    somber, aldo90731 and Prabhjot like this.
  9. MJAB

    MJAB Active Member

    Likes:
    1,869
    Maybe inform ourselves before writing is better.
    1) in Italy one plant was closed (in Sicily) and some other smaller ones.
    2) Fiat and now FCA are super expert in taking private their profits and share with public balance and other private companies the loses.
    How? "cassa integrazione guadagni ordinaria" and "cassa integrazione guadagni staordinaria" and other ways.
    3) the number of Fiat workers in Italy decreased heavily over decades, just to say.

    Especially You, working in automotive sector, should put more attention to inform You better.
    Not a critic, just an annotation.
     
  10. aldo90731

    aldo90731 Active Member Level III Supporter

    Likes:
    6,066
    Lighten up. I was poking fun at one of your cohorts enlightening us the other day why it is permissible to keep unproductive plants open in Italy as a jobs-saving measure.
     
  11. jimboy

    jimboy Member

    Likes:
    437
    Has anyone considered the cost of switching from CATIA? design to the current one FCA chose instead ? (sorry; can't remember the acronym) Is the relatively poorer/worse system costing more money due to it's lack of capability compared to the Chrysler system? Are some of the design flaws/engineering problems the result of this lesser system? I know that Bob Sheaves isn't around so much these days, can anyone else make an educated guess, here?
     
  12. Alexbucks

    Alexbucks Member

    Likes:
    257
    That's revisionist history to say the least
     
    Prabhjot likes this.
  13. Alexbucks

    Alexbucks Member

    Likes:
    257
    It follow more profitable to make an Alfa/Jeep in Italy than making a mass market European product in those plants. Hence, the financial results.

    To make any other suggestion is just clueless.
     
    ScramFan and Prabhjot like this.
  14. Erik Latranyi

    Erik Latranyi Well-Known Member Level III Supporter

    Likes:
    8,009
    Dagar, you do not buy a multi-million dollar machine and make parts worth $100K every year on it. That machine has to have a payback in a shorter timeframe.

    If you went to an investor and said I need $2 billion to develop the Giorgio platform, but I will milk the existing platforms for cash until then, they will tell you to get lost. Why shoudl they give you $2 billion if that does not result in GREATER cash than what you have now?

    In fact, the vehicles you are building on that $2 billion investment are losing money because they do not generate enough positive margins to cover the fixed costs of the assembly plant.

    Dodge and Jeep will not be generating anything on the Giorgio investment for another 4 years at a minimum. Until then, it is all Alfa......which was supposed to have 8 vehicles in a 2-3 years and will now have 2 vehicles in 2 years. Those two vehicles will not create a payback sufficient to recoup the investment into Giorgio until maybe 5 years down the road.
     
    DarkSky likes this.
  15. Erik Latranyi

    Erik Latranyi Well-Known Member Level III Supporter

    Likes:
    8,009
    This is the first time you made a modicum of sense!

    Yes, if Alfa/Jeep actually shared Giorgio, then they could be building Grand Cherokees with an Alfa and Maserati equivalent to service Europe and the Middle East. Meanwhile, Jeep in the US would be building the Grand Cherokee for NAFTA consumption.

    That is how you do platform sharing in the 21st Century!

    Let Turkey or Poland build mass market Fiats for Europe.

    But.

    Currently, we have very little platform sharing. CUSW is a dead-end and will die when the Cherokee and Pacifica are redesigned.

    SUSW is a success and will spawn more variants for another generation. Then, I predict it will die as well to be replaced by a better platform that is FWD/AWD/RWD and can support a wider variety of vehicles.

    Right now, Giorgio is two vehicles and very little more for another 4 years.