The pickup market is still hot. I give credit that the interiors and quality have been better than the other brands. That is significant in that it shows quality is possible while making profits.That is why the head of the NA operations SHOULD be a product person that understands this market. We have nothing and I mean nothing close to that at the moment. Ram guy seems to understand Ram. That's about it.
You are still commenting on a market you fail to understand while viewing from afar. Here are the basics:Finally: where possibly does the confidence in the face of ALL evidence hitherto arise here that a jeep renegade and compass and chrokee by another name(s) ie as dodge s andor chrysler s would involve higher avg transctn prices? Lower incentives? Even better fleet and dealer inventories?
Going by the pre2008 history of c, gm as well as ford: THAT is the only relevant benchmark.
Yes, FCA had short-term gains that are already being eroded away. That is not brand management, but brand dilution and destruction.You are still commenting on a market you fail to understand while viewing from afar. Here are the basics:
1) FCA had a large fuel economy problem.
2) Making everything “Jeep” made the vehicles heavier to add some marginal level of capability to make them Jeeps. This compounded the costs for failing to meet targets.
3) Jeep does not have a quality reputation among the general public. Those great margins you brag about are killed by the incentives necessary to move these small FWD based Jeeps.
4) The quality problems and flooding the market with these cheap Jeeps reduces the Jeep premium. This is the cost the FCA supporters fail to consider. You can’t have a Dodge or Chrysler CUV because of “margins” but you will justify a Jeep that slowly lowers Jeep margins. A trio of small Jeeps that are getting kicked around solidly by Toyota RAV4.
Perhaps FCA should have protected Jeep’s reputation rather than prostitute if for a few more dollars today without considering the long term damage to the brand.