Allpar Forums banner

1 - 20 of 50 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
4,087 Posts
Discussion Starter #1

It's fine. Of course COVID-19 struck hard. PSA sacrificed a lot for sales while FCA took the hit with FY margins but already in Q4 it was at excellent level.

It seems that PSA is late with P2 MHEV tech for their FWD cars. Chinese e-DCT (fake DCT because of single clutch) is at the heart of it.
79625


FCA will start production of P2 MHEV cars on Small Wide platform late this year. 1.5 turbo engine and Magna/Getrag wet DCT are at the heart of it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,257 Posts
Look at slide 51. 100% of light duty range (everything but Ram) in North America will offer a PHEV for 2025! That's an all new range for Chrysler and Dodge within 4 years (possibly excluding Pacifica).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,257 Posts
You mean, that the side that barely got any investment in the past 6 years isn't returning any profit? Yes, shocking.
Barely got any investment? LOL

Dodge + Chrysler 1 net new model since 2009.

Fiat 15 new models since 2009
Alfa 4 new models since 2009, 1 all new platform
Maserati 3 new models since 2009
Lancia 1 new model since 2009

I don't know why you Italian car fans keep complaining. Please don't tell me about Jeep and Ram trucks, without them there would have been no FCA left to merge with PSA.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,027 Posts
Barely got any investment? LOL

Dodge + Chrysler 1 net new model since 2009.

Fiat 15 new models since 2009
Alfa 4 new models since 2009, 1 all new platform
Maserati 3 new models since 2009
Lancia 1 new model since 2009

I don't know why you Italian car fans keep complaining. Please don't tell me about Jeep and Ram trucks, without them there would have been no FCA left to merge with PSA.
Yes, because I can go Brasil to get the Fiat models...
Alfa, last I seen you can get it in there as well.
Maserati is out of my price range.
And it's funny how you conveniently ignore Jeep and Ram.

Be more intelectually honest.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
37,708 Posts
Yes, because I can go Brasil to get the Fiat models...
Alfa, last I seen you can get it in there as well.
Maserati is out of my price range.
And it's funny how you conveniently ignore Jeep and Ram.

Be more intelectually honest.
So lets add Ram and Jeep.
After 2009:
Ram: DT, refreshed HD trucks,two vans imported from Europe.
Jeep: Wrangler, Gladiator, one new Grand Cherokee and a mild refresh, a trio of slow selling FWD based Jeeps.

That's still pretty pathetic for 12 years. Yes, as always new product is "Coming soon" for Jeep.
There is a huge amount of "catching up" to do. The remainder of the auto industry hasn't been standing still.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,027 Posts
So lets add Ram and Jeep.
After 2009:
Ram: DT, refreshed HD trucks,two vans imported from Europe.
Jeep: Wrangler, Gladiator, one new Grand Cherokee and a mild refresh, a trio of slow selling FWD based Jeeps.

That's still pretty pathetic for 12 years. Yes, as always new product is "Coming soon" for Jeep.
There is a huge amount of "catching up" to do. The remainder of the auto industry hasn't been standing still.
So lets see Fiat in Europe:
We got the Tipo, and the 500X. Now we got the 500e. It lost the Freemont, and the Punto. The Panda and the 500 are nearly as old as the Chrysler 300/Dodge Charger.
You talk about Alfa? Lets talk about it then. We got the Giulia and Stelvio? We lost the Mito and the Giulietta.

Funny that you are conveniently forgeting the Grand Wagoneer that was already shown. And how you don't put the name of the Cherokee, the Compass and the Renegade to make the list seem smaller. And by the way, some of those are not "slow selling". The Compass sells above 400k units globally. You don't think it sells enough in the US? Ask the US branch manaagers why the hell it's still only available with the 2.4 engine.

See? It's pathetic everywhere!! Woohoo!
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
37,708 Posts
So lets see Fiat in Europe:
We got the Tipo, and the 500X. Now we got the 500e. It lost the Freemont, and the Punto. The Panda and the 500 are nearly as old as the Chrysler 300/Dodge Charger.
You talk about Alfa? Lets talk about it then. We got the Giulia and Stelvio? We lost the Mito and the Giulietta.

Funny that you are conveniently forgeting the Grand Wagoneer that was already shown. And how you don't put the name of the Cherokee, the Compass and the Renegade to make the list seem smaller. And by the way, some of those are not "slow selling". The Compass sells above 400k units globally. You don't think it sells enough in the US? Ask the US branch manaagers why the hell it's still only available with the 2.4 engine.

See? It's pathetic everywhere!! Woohoo!
I'm not forgetting anything. Only vehicles available now made my list.
And I've long said FCA had too many brands for the amount of money they were willing to invest.They needed to drop brands or invest more. But they did not, meaning most every brand now needs a rebirth.
The problem is the excuse for abandoning markets in the US ("we have to concentrate on high margins") has not been applied to investments in regions.

I can ask why these small Jeeps were only available with the 2.4 engine, but I think in reality we all know the reason. The investment they were allowed to make was determined from above.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,445 Posts
So lets see Fiat in Europe:
We got the Tipo, and the 500X. Now we got the 500e. It lost the Freemont, and the Punto. The Panda and the 500 are nearly as old as the Chrysler 300/Dodge Charger.
You talk about Alfa? Lets talk about it then. We got the Giulia and Stelvio? We lost the Mito and the Giulietta.

Funny that you are conveniently forgeting the Grand Wagoneer that was already shown. And how you don't put the name of the Cherokee, the Compass and the Renegade to make the list seem smaller. And by the way, some of those are not "slow selling". The Compass sells above 400k units globally. You don't think it sells enough in the US? Ask the US branch manaagers why the hell it's still only available with the 2.4 engine.

See? It's pathetic everywhere!! Woohoo!
Maybe you should read this thread: Prosecutors show an unsettling path to save Chrysler | Allpar Forums

Decisions were not made by the US branch without Marchionne's approval. This nullifies everyone trying to say the lack of new or refreshed product (or improved powertrains) was a US-only decision.
 
  • Like
Reactions: David S

·
Banned
Joined
·
4,087 Posts
Discussion Starter #11

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,445 Posts
  • Like
Reactions: David S

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
37,708 Posts
The full story is not yet known and continues to be written.
For example Lee Iacocca was Chrysler's savior. Now looking back, he also later ended up being Chrysler's worst enemy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,027 Posts
I'm not forgetting anything. Only vehicles available now made my list.
And I've long said FCA had too many brands for the amount of money they were willing to invest.They needed to drop brands or invest more. But they did not, meaning most every brand now needs a rebirth.
The problem is the excuse for abandoning markets in the US ("we have to concentrate on high margins") has not been applied to investments in regions.

I can ask why these small Jeeps were only available with the 2.4 engine, but I think in reality we all know the reason. The investment they were allowed to make was determined from above.
So I expect you would support them if they killed Chrysler and Dodge then? That's what I take from your comment. Good to know.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
37,708 Posts
So I expect you would support them if they killed Chrysler and Dodge then? That's what I take from your comment. Good to know.
You can take that if you want - but I said no such thing
The fact is resources were not being properly allocated to many brands. It hasn't (yet) killed them but the longer a brand remains stagnant the harder and more costly it is to resurrect.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Erik Latranyi

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,854 Posts
History will judge...

He is Chrysler's saviour. End of story
In my book he is so much like Iacocca. Saved the company, but didn't know how to run a successful company long term. Lee was out buying jet companies while he should've been investing in future products. Sergio did exactly the same thing, except he was looking for a merger partner instead. IMHO, he became obsessed with controlling GM and when she wouldn't agree, he was finished. He lost interest, then he got sick. The outcome has been the same.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,434 Posts
If one 'accounts' properly for the fact that fca's n american operations had (a) literally dead brands in 2008/9, necessitating over a billion$ in just advertizing expenditure for just the usa in first few post 2008 years (b) the gutted engineering and r&d state of chrysler corp as of 2008 (c) the exorbitant pension and healthcare costs of the n american uaw workforce, relative to Italy/europe (c) the neolithic decrepitude of all of fca's n american plants necessitating many billions of $ of investment just to b serviceable and uptodate (d) the huge n america centric debt that was offloaded onto ferrari....while europe and brazil hardly lost money in the decade after 2008, net net, despite 2 full blown recessions and now, post vw dieselgate etc, epic regulatory costs....precisely because investment was kept on a very very tight leash (even the new Tipo was a turkish jv project, only part funded by fca...etc (e) marchionne kept pushing for a global merger for huge cost savings through scale economies, first trying for opel, then acquiring chrysler and then gm......pt is marchionne was a devilishly visionary executive, but also: reports of the great financial health/returns of fca's n american operations and brands in and of themselves as if as automata independent of marchionne &team are both premature and exagerated! If one adjusts for all the qe and other money printing etc fca's n american operations are not particularly free of the taint of 'not able to earn their cost of capital over the business cycle' (refer m's confessions of a capital junkie)! Of course that is only many times truer of ford as well as gm....
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
37,708 Posts
If one 'accounts' properly for the fact that fca's n american operations had (a) literally dead brands in 2008/9, necessitating over a billion$ in just advertizing expenditure for just the usa in first few post 2008 years (b) the gutted engineering and r&d state of chrysler corp as of 2008 (c) the exorbitant pension and healthcare costs of the n american uaw workforce, relative to Italy/europe (c) the neolithic decrepitude of all of fca's n american plants necessitating many billions of $ of investment just to b serviceable and uptodate (d) the huge n america centric debt that was offloaded onto ferrari....while europe and brazil hardly lost money in the decade after 2008, net net, despite 2 full blown recessions and now, post vw dieselgate etc, epic regulatory costs....precisely because investment was kept on a very very tight leash (even the new Tipo was a turkish jv project, only part funded by fca...etc (e) marchionne kept pushing for a global merger for huge cost savings through scale economies, first trying for opel, then acquiring chrysler and then gm......pt is marchionne was a devilishly visionary executive, but also: reports of the great financial health/returns of fca's n american operations and brands in and of themselves as if as automata independent of marchionne &team are both premature and exagerated! If one adjusts for all the qe and other money printing etc fca's n american operations are not particularly free of the taint of 'not able to earn their cost of capital over the business cycle' (refer m's confessions of a capital junkie)! Of course that is only many times truer of ford as well as gm....
So it’s expensive to make cars, I assume FCA knew this. Sergio showed his only vision was merger, not doing a just job financially to any FCA brand.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,434 Posts
Well if he'd assumed as a basis for action what he no doubt suspected, that trillions would b deployed via fiscal stimulus and that the real cost of capital would in effect b sub zero (via endless qe in not just the usa but also europe) thereby seemingly abolishing the very thing he was playing for (survival and health in and through the full post 2008 crisis business cycle in both europe and n america)....he might have and maybe ought to have just taken on more debt on both continents to have delivered the phantasmatic 'full lineups' for all the brands, and not have bothered with even the third or fourth best merger choice of psa.;)Free money and debt for all, esp zombie?corporations and other plutocrats of which admittedly john elkann and family are a fine example.

Monetary jokes apart....he could not have assumed endlessly free money and near free and near riskfree debt now could he? In good capitalist faith, that is?? ;)
 
1 - 20 of 50 Posts
Top