Didn't the Caliber have its best years when it was most stripped down and cheap looking? I think you get to a point where you distance yourself from those that just want to buy a cheap new car that don't care about any of the premium feel.bumonbox said:I've said before I think they will get the Dart right, but I have also said it confirms my feelings about Sergio's understanding of our market. I think Sergio has some learning to do about the US market. I think he may not have realized or understood what the Dart was likely to face in terms of packaging. It is packaged too much like a Euro car.
I think he is a great CEO who is good at leading, and understands numbers, but I do not have absolute faith in his understanding of our market. This is why I am so critical of the Minivan situation, and the Jeep situation. He had some rather negative things to say about Jeep's outgoing offerings, what's funny is they were still selling, not great, but not horrid. He couldn't understand why, but I think it's simply because he doesn't quite understand that market.
Except the Dart isn't even truly sporty really. I think Mazda's issues are substantially larger than being sporty. It's a matter of dedication to the image. And this is the important thing for Sergio. There is a balancing point between volume and commitment to image. If you have a brand, like Dodge that needs to be both, then accept it, and allow the sporty vehicles to coexist with volume vehicles. I still don't feel the Ram split was necessary. I don't feel dropping the minivan is necessary. They can still have the volume vehicles with a sporty touch. The reality is, Dodge may have the masculine / sporty image, but it has always been about more than that. It is also a mainstream brand, and they shouldn't run from that. The dart can be sorta cool and sporty, but if they want it to succeed, it must also mainstream offerings / packaging.Aldo said:Part of Dart's struggle is due to Mr. Marchionne stripping Dodge of a proper volume lineup, and because "sporty" puts vehicles in a niche spot in the US market.
There is nothing wrong with "sporty", but "volume" and "sporty" are at opposite ends --just look at Toyota vs Mazda; VW had to sacrifice some "sporty" to grow volume in the US.
Marchionne has demonstrated zero ability for building, protecting or understanding BRAND. His years before Chrysler are replete with examples of brands being demolished, abused, and/or ignored (depending on your point-of-view).bumonbox said:Except the Dart isn't even truly sporty really. I think Mazda's issues are substantially larger than being sporty. It's a matter of dedication to the image. And this is the important thing for Sergio. There is a balancing point between volume and commitment to image. If you have a brand, like Dodge that needs to be both, then accept it, and allow the sporty vehicles to coexist with volume vehicles. I still don't feel the Ram split was necessary. I don't feel dropping the minivan is necessary. They can still have the volume vehicles with a sporty touch. The reality is, Dodge may have the masculine / sporty image, but it has always been about more than that. It is also a mainstream brand, and they shouldn't run from that. The dart can be sorta cool and sporty, but if they want it to succeed, it must also mainstream offerings / packaging.
Completely agree. Chrysler has momentum, Sergio knew what to do to get them into the black. In the end, I suspect Sergio is better at saving companies than maintaining their health.Erik Latranyi said:Marchionne has demonstrated zero ability for building, protecting or understanding BRAND. His years before Chrysler are replete with examples of brands being demolished, abused, and/or ignored (depending on your point-of-view).
There is no doubt that Marchionne is a fantastic leader, negotiator and numbers-man. If he wants to be remembered as truly great, he will recognize his weakness and empower others who will compensate for his shortcomings. Unfortunately, his brand managers (with the exception of Ralph at SRT) are all numbers people who also demonstrate little talent for nurturing a BRAND.
Like which brand?Erik Latranyi said:Marchionne has demonstrated zero ability for building, protecting or understanding BRAND. His years before Chrysler are replete with examples of brands being demolished, abused, and/or ignored (depending on your point-of-view).
That would be true if he understood the European market; but he doesn't either. Fact is, it's not a problem of him not understanding the market, it's a problem of him not understanding "product".bumonbox said:I've said before I think they will get the Dart right, but I have also said it confirms my feelings about Sergio's understanding of our market. I think Sergio has some learning to do about the US market. I think he may not have realized or understood what the Dart was likely to face in terms of packaging. It is packaged too much like a Euro car.
This, this is precisely the issue. He just doesn't seem to grasp/care at all if and how a product matches the values and identity of a brand.Erik Latranyi said:Marchionne has demonstrated zero ability for building, protecting or understanding BRAND. His years before Chrysler are replete with examples of brands being demolished, abused, and/or ignored (depending on your point-of-view).
Yep!Dan Minick said:So, the Lancias that do sell, weren't really anything to do with Chrysler. The ones that don't sell were rebadged Chryslers.
So future Lancias will ALL be Chryslers... just like the ones that don't sell. This makes absolutely no sense.
Yes, Marchionne is very careless with his comments about past product. You can already see him starting to do this with the Dart.RVC said:Now, leaving aside SMs typical disregard for the thousands of people that bought and still own that car, how can you say that, and after 20 minutes be on record saying that "Lancias in Europe will be supplied by Chrysler".
It would be comical if it wasn't so damn worrying.
Agreed, but then just take the damn decision to kill the brand and not be in that market with either Chrysler or Lancia, instead of losing money and getting a bad rep with clients of the group with this nonsense.IMHO, I think there IS potential for a combined L-C brand, however, efforts here seem to have been put on a dusty shelf, while Alfa & Maserati are dusted off and drooled over. Having vented that, it probably does honestly boil down to where investment euros will gain the most in investing in upscale brands. Alfa & Maserati probably do have more long term potential.
It's because history is bunk. Oh, wait that was someone else who used ethnic slurs who said that......Erik Latranyi said:Yes, Marchionne is very careless with his comments about past product. You can already see him starting to do this with the Dart.
Well, Chrysler has to exist in the USA, and Lancia is dualed with Jeep in Euro. But, true, IF they need a lineup at Jeep dealers, maybe they should go back to Chrysler-Jeep in europe and kill Lancia. Investing in Lancia as a TRUE Lancia brand is just going to go head to head with Alfa. Fiat doesn't have the big pockets like VW to simply let them both (Alfa & Lancia) slug it out and compete to have the best product. That's something GM used to excel at back in 1950's 1960s, and VW does still to some extent.RVC said:Agreed, but then just take the damn decision to kill the brand and not be in that market with either Chrysler or Lancia, instead of losing money and getting a bad rep with clients of the group with this nonsense.
The same can be said of many other CEOs like Lee Iacocca, Carlos Gohsn. The leadership abilities to cut costs and turn around are different from the vision required to take a company into the future.bumonbox said:In the end, I suspect Sergio is better at saving companies than maintaining their health.