Allpar Forums banner
161 - 180 of 207 Posts

·
Virginia Gentleman
Joined
·
16,382 Posts
Interesing question about dealerships and paperwork. Around here I've seen dealers now charging a $300 documetation fee. Wonder what the dealership would charge for documentation fees if they don't actually make any money off the sale of said vehicle??
That's cheap for documentation fees. Around here it's more like $300-$999. The closest dealer to me (Ford & CDJR) has a $999 documentation fee on every sale. Our last purchase at CarMax the documentation fee was only $299 or so.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,986 Posts
That's cheap for documentation fees. Around here it's more like $300-$999. The closest dealer to me (Ford & CDJR) has a $999 documentation fee on every sale. Our last purchase at CarMax the documentation fee was only $299 or so.
wowzers! Out here in the Midwest the fees have generally been around $199 up until this point. Thousand dollars for doc fees, just ridiculous!
 

·
Virginia Gentleman
Joined
·
16,382 Posts
wowzers! Out here in the Midwest the fees have generally been around $199 up until this point. Thousand dollars for doc fees, just ridiculous!
Yeah, they stick it to you. Here in VA, there is no legal limit on such fees. They can charge whatever the market will bear. Maryland does have a limit - $300, I think.
 

·
Registered
1979 Lincoln Town Car, 1987 Chevrolet Silverado, 1990 Chrysler Imperial
Joined
·
2,586 Posts
That's cheap for documentation fees. Around here it's more like $300-$999. The closest dealer to me (Ford & CDJR) has a $999 documentation fee on every sale. Our last purchase at CarMax the documentation fee was only $299 or so.
Those fees are insane.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
40,825 Posts
Some do, some when told the fee is non-negotiable will stop the deal. One dealer suddenly found $500 more off the price we’d negotiated (which I felt was already a good deal) when I said I wouldn’t pay $700 for paperwork.
 
  • Like
Reactions: redhed

·
Virginia Gentleman
Joined
·
16,382 Posts
Isn't it amazing business are charging people hundreds and even a thousand dollars to sign a paper that they need signed.... And people pay it....
I just find it amazing that some buyers will pay such an outrageous fee ($1000) for "paperwork". I can see $199-$299, but $1,000? I can only shake my head. For that price I'll take the paperwork down to DMV and wait a few hours.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
155 Posts
This "final edition" 300C is a nice, unexpected send-off (though I wish the interior weren't limited to black-on-black). Chrysler could have easily done nothing and let the model die quietly.

That said, I found Christine Feuell's presentation concerning. While I can forgive the fact that she's not a great public speaker, the messaging about brand's future was uninspiring at best. Chrysler is "mainstream mobility"? What does that even mean? How is it in any way aspirational? Are the buying and ownership experiences (while worthy of attention and improvement) really the most exciting topics she has to discuss? I understand that Stellantis might still be fleshing out its plan for the brand, but in that case it would have been better to just focus on the 300C and its history instead of offering platitudes about the future.
 

·
LOAD "*",8,1
2022 Ford Maverick Hybrid, 2018 Kia Niro
Joined
·
1,131 Posts
Chrysler is "mainstream mobility"? What does that even mean? How is it in any way aspirational?
It's not aspirational. It's not meant to be. She's essentially saying Chrysler will become Chevy, Ford, or Toyota (or Hyundai). They're the mass market brand now. Makes sense with Dodge chasing horsepower (and now corner carving). Stellantis needs a mass market brand for the US and it just makes more sense to re-use something that already exists (Chrysler) than trying to create Peugot from whole cloth (or try AGAIN to re-create FIAT). And if they try to do that with Dodge they'll get a mass rebellion of the gearheads, where Dodge is actually successful and has some growth potential. Chrysler wasn't going anwhere. Now it might. It may not be aspirational, but the brand now has a future.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
40,825 Posts
It's not aspirational. It's not meant to be. She's essentially saying Chrysler will become Chevy, Ford, or Toyota (or Hyundai). They're the mass market brand now. Makes sense with Dodge chasing horsepower (and now corner carving). Stellantis needs a mass market brand for the US and it just makes more sense to re-use something that already exists (Chrysler) than trying to create Peugot from whole cloth (or try AGAIN to re-create FIAT). And if they try to do that with Dodge they'll get a mass rebellion of the gearheads, where Dodge is actually successful and has some growth potential. Chrysler wasn't going anwhere. Now it might. It may not be aspirational, but the brand now has a future.
The “mainstream” and “people mover” labels did nothing for Chrysler under FCA and won’t build Chrysler’s brand image now. Even basic transportation needs an aspirational angle. For Toyota it is quality. For Hyundai it is value and gaining in quality. For Chevrolet, even the basic models share in the brand’s performance history. Same with Ford.
Aspirational would be something like “transportation with style”, “luxury touches at a mainstream price”. Something more exciting than warm milk.
 

·
LOAD "*",8,1
2022 Ford Maverick Hybrid, 2018 Kia Niro
Joined
·
1,131 Posts
The “mainstream” and “people mover” labels did nothing for Chrysler under FCA
Tjhat's because FCA never sunk any money into Chrysler besides some "people mover" stickers. Sergio was always more interested in building the FIAT and Alfa brands in the US. The 500x should have been a Chrysler. The upcoming 500e should be a Chrysler. Some of the new Peugots too. Right now the best Chrysler can aspire to is relevance. After that, maybe include some premium touches, but first they need product.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
40,825 Posts
Tjhat's because FCA never sunk any money into Chrysler besides some "people mover" stickers. Sergio was always more interested in building the FIAT and Alfa brands in the US. The 500x should have been a Chrysler. The upcoming 500e should be a Chrysler. Some of the new Peugots too. Right now the best Chrysler can aspire to is relevance. After that, maybe include some premium touches, but first they need product.
Building a brand revolving around rebadged imports didn’t work for Eagle. Chrysler needs better than that if it’s expected to survive.
 

·
Administrator
1974 Plymouth Valiant - 2013 Dodge Dart - 2013 Chrysler 300C
Joined
·
40,224 Posts
Sergio built the 200, which cost billions. That was a serious investment into Chrysler. So was the Pacifica. Both were meant to be above the equivalent Toyotas. FCA tried.

I go back and look at the original Chrysler, and it was above the common Chevrolet and Ford, but in appearance, price, and trim, nowhere near the Packards, Hudsons, Cadillacs, and such. Chrysler has never had all its cars at the "top of the range," as far as I can recall. Maybe for a few years with DeSoto in the works in the 1940s and 1950s? But for the most part they've always had something like the Newport, or the Cordoba, or the Volare-based LeBaron. Chrysler has overlapped with Dodge since at least 1961 and probably earlier. The Plymouth GTX overlapped in price with Chrysler. (Nobody bought it because it overlapped in price with Chrysler.)

Yes, they had Imperials, often under the Imperial brand, but nothing’s stopping Chrysler from having a $100,000 car; Jeep has the Wagoneer, after all, Ram has their luxury editions, and so on. Dodge had the Viper, Chevrolet has the Corvette.

Chrysler has been Plymouth With Chrome since they dropped Plymouth. But it wasn't that far above Plymouth for most of my adult life.
 

·
LOAD "*",8,1
2022 Ford Maverick Hybrid, 2018 Kia Niro
Joined
·
1,131 Posts
Sergio built the 200, which cost billions. That was a serious investment into Chrysler.
The 200 was a rebadged Dart, which also failed. So while it was a Chrysler model, it wasn't all that big of an investment...it was an existing Fiat platform mildly reengineered as a Dodge and Chrysler model. If they spend billions on that they need to be asking where the money went.

The Pacifica was a rather large investment, and thank the car gods that it went reasonably well because right now it's Chrysler's only model once the 300 bows out. Which is a very bad thing, I have doubts Chrysler can last long enough with just a minivan to come up with more bespoke models. Rebadged Peugeots and Fiats and Opels on the other hand might give them a lifeline until they can get through a product design cycle. Though to be honest I don't see Peugeot, Opel, Citroen, Fiat, and Chrysler making completely bespoke models (and you can probably throw Alfa and Dodge into the pot too). There's going to be platform and parts sharing, it would be a waste of resources otherwise.
 

·
Administrator
1974 Plymouth Valiant - 2013 Dodge Dart - 2013 Chrysler 300C
Joined
·
40,224 Posts
200 was not “a rebadged Dart.” It was a multibillion investment. Yes, it shared with the Dart, and the Cherokee, and the Pacifica, but it was still huge. Just like Pacifica.

I don't see them getting rebadged Peugeots any more. Now I see them getting new BEVs which will probably be shared, underneath, with Peugeot.
 

·
LOAD "*",8,1
2022 Ford Maverick Hybrid, 2018 Kia Niro
Joined
·
1,131 Posts
200 was not “a rebadged Dart.” It was a multibillion investment.
They could have bought the Brooklyn Bridge from me instead and had plenty of money to swap the Dart badges for 200 badges. They were both built off of CUSW, so most of the development cost was shared between them. And that's probably the way forward too...but Chrysler needs product NOW, just like Dodge, only Chrysler is even worse off now that Dodge has the Hornet coming.
 
161 - 180 of 207 Posts
Top