FCA means more to American manufacturing than GM,and Chrysler was the one that almost was allowed to pass away in 2009.

FCA has the least exposure (well "dependence" in GM's case) to China.

 

Chrysler would have survived regardless. The US Government just didn't want to deal with GM *and* Chrysler so that was just a way out.

Fiat and Chrysler have wanted a relationship since the early '90s so it was a win-win for everyone.

 

Chrysler would have survived regardless. The US Government just didn't want to deal with GM *and* Chrysler so that was just a way out.

Fiat and Chrysler have wanted a relationship since the early '90s so it was a win-win for everyone.

Chrysler would have not it , it opinion of the Uncle Sam that "Chrysler has no path as a standalone viably business". Its Fiat (Sergio & John) or no money (Chapter 7 liquidation).

 

I guess it's time to use that meme.
Ron Paul - It's Happening GIF [IMGUR] (at https://imgur.com/gallery/7drHiqr )

 

But, question I will leave: Will Toyota overtake GM in U.S. Manufacturing especally with the new MS plant coming online, GM shrinking, and adding Subaru to Toyota? If so when?

 

FCA means more to American manufacturing than GM,and Chrysler was the one that almost was allowed to pass away in 2009.

FCA has the least exposure (well "dependence" in GM's case) to China.

Mary Barra is the Carley Fiorina of the automotive world. What she is doing to that company is disgraceful. You think she would be asahmed that GM is loosing market share and is now has the smallest employment of the Big Three. I hope the UAW holds GM's feet to the fire and gets plants like Hamtramck and Lordstown "reallocated."

 

Chrysler continues to prosper despite itself. This is welcome news. I could care less about GM. They deserve everything they get. If Chrysler could now focus on quality more and improving it's dealers, they will be ok regardless of who they merge with.

 

"Despite itself."Nope.
Because of itself, all thousand that work for FCA, and yes John Elkann's support is why a great amount of the damage by Daimler has been undone,

 

I want all of the Detroit car companies to thrive. GM, Ford, Chrysler.
Truth be told, Chrysler should always be in 3rd place. It's part of the appeal of Chrysler to be behind GM and Ford. Same thing with American Motors. If it had ever moved ahead of Chrysler, the natural order of the universe would have been thrown off kilter. I miss American Motors!

 

I want all of the Detroit car companies to thrive. GM, Ford, Chrysler.
Truth be told, Chrysler should always be in 3rd place. It's part of the appeal of Chrysler to be behind GM and Ford. Same thing with American Motors. If it had ever moved ahead of Chrysler, the natural order of the universe would have been thrown off kilter. I miss American Motors!

I agree with your first statement. But I would be very happy if Chrysler moved into first place due to strong execution (I would not want them to just have first place fall into their laps because GM and Ford tanked).

I also miss American Motors. I can't explain why, but I really liked the goofy-looking 1976 AMC Pacer I had in college. Drove that thing on many beach trips. My roommates couldn't believe how much stuff would fit into it.

 

FCA will crush GM in the US within five years.

 

AND if GM finds itself no longer able to do business in China,GM becomes smaller than FCA Globally overnight.

Base on how China is acting in Hong Kong as we post on Allpar (they arrested two of the main protesters)....

 

Not sure “number of employees” is a metric worth bragging about. Not by itself, anyway.

By that measure, the Pentagon would be the best organization we have.

 

Aldo, its not bragging.You miss understood the thread.
It Industrial Importance to one's nation.

If there are "Chrysler fans", this should be a happy thread, people have a job that they otherwise wouldn't have.

 

Honestly? GM has been working very hard to position itself for the next economic downturn. They are currently in the best position of all the domestics to withstand an extended recession. Got out of Europe. Despite their cost cutting and restructuring, they still are among the leaders in BEV and autonomous technology and are significantly expanding their commercial vehicle line. Ford is mired in a prolonged and overdue restructuring, is weak in China, and is losing significant money in Europe. They do have some interesting vehicles in the pipeline though. FCA? Currently doing well with trucks and SUV's, but........

Nothing significant in the product pipeline.
Well behind in BEV and autonomous technology.
Almost non-existent in China.
Far to heavily exposed in Europe.

It's almost as though Exor is Cerberus in slow motion. They have broken up the former Fiat empire (which unlocked a lot of shareholder value), done much to strengthen FCA's bottom line, and spent as little as possible on future product. Pretty obvious Exon would like to sell of all or part of FCA.

BTW- looks like CNH wants to spin off Iveco. I had always hoped Iveco would have got together with Ram in North America. That was Diaz's vision before he left for Nissan.

 

Honestly? GM has been working very hard to position itself for the next economic downturn. They are currently in the best position of all the domestics to withstand an extended recession. Got out of Europe. Despite their cost cutting and restructuring, they still are among the leaders in BEV and autonomous technology and are significantly expanding their commercial vehicle line. Ford is mired in a prolonged and overdue restructuring, is weak in China, and is losing significant money in Europe. They do have some interesting vehicles in the pipeline though. FCA? Currently doing well with trucks and SUV's, but........

Nothing significant in the product pipeline.
Well behind in BEV and autonomous technology.
Almost non-existent in China.
Far to heavily exposed in Europe.

It's almost as though Exor is Cerberus in slow motion. They have broken up the former Fiat empire (which unlocked a lot of shareholder value), done much to strengthen FCA's bottom line, and spent as little as possible on future product. Pretty obvious Exon would like to sell of all or part of FCA.

BTW- looks like CNH wants to spin off Iveco. I had always hoped Iveco would have got together with Ram in North America. That was Diaz's vision before he left for Nissan.

Huh
Alphabet/Google are ahead of GM in Autonomous, and FCA has a deep relationship with Alphabet(Waymo).

*FCA has another Autonomous relationship with BMW that is expanding to cover Daimler & Audi: Mobileye & Aptiv are involved as well.

*As for electric, FCA is using Samsung,LG Chem,Manga,and Dana.
GM has no real advantage given the Bolt being a flop. It is a differnce in approach where FCA thinks different levels of hybirds will be a needed middle ground.

And given what's going on in Hong Kong+Declining auto sales, Europe just may end up a better place to invest than China.

 

That's an interesting take. FCA's relationships with autonomous vehicle suppliers are not in any case exclusive, and it would be a stretch to call any of then deep beyond FCA supplying vehicles to them. GM's Cruise is a division of GM, and is very much on the cutting edge, otherwise Honda would not have invested in it and Cruise would not be valued at over $19B. That's billion with a 'B'.

Bolt is not a flop at all. It is limited production (like all BEV's, it is not profitable yet), but the car gets rave reviews and is quite popular in places like Southern California. The Bolt is a step on the learning curve, giving GM valuable BEV experience. GM is also involved in many of the BEV suppliers you listed.

Hybrids are done. They were important in that they gave manufacturers experience in battery technology and built consumer confidence in electrics, but most major manufacturers are moving away from hybrids. If a BEV can give a range of 250-300 miles, and an 80-90% recharge in 10-20 minutes, why bother? Hybrids will still be around short-term, but as charging infrastructure is built they will eventually fade away.

China has problems, but it is still by far the largest market for motor vehicles in the world. Europe is shrinking and potentially has even more issues (Brexit for one). Which one looks better long term?

 

That's an interesting take. FCA's relationships with autonomous vehicle suppliers are not in any case exclusive, and it would be a stretch to call any of then deep beyond FCA supplying vehicles to them. GM's Cruise is a division of GM, and is very much on the cutting edge, otherwise Honda would not have invested in it and Cruise would not be valued at over $19B. That's billion with a 'B'.

Bolt is not a flop at all. It is limited production (like all BEV's, it is not profitable yet), but the car gets rave reviews and is quite popular in places like Southern California. The Bolt is a step on the learning curve, giving GM valuable BEV experience. GM is also involved in many of the BEV suppliers you listed.

Hybrids are done. They were important in that they gave manufacturers experience in battery technology and built consumer confidence in electrics, but most major manufacturers are moving away from hybrids. If a BEV can give a range of 250-300 miles, and an 80-90% recharge in 10-20 minutes, why bother? Hybrids will still be around short-term, but as charging infrastructure is built they will eventually fade away.

China has problems, but it is still by far the largest market for motor vehicles in the world. Europe is shrinking and potentially has even more issues (Brexit for one). Which one looks better long term?

All of the large (starting price in $35K+) FCA SUVs are getting hybrid versions.

 

When "the Italians" arrived, many were justifiably wary of what would happen to Chrysler, based on the experience of Daimler.

FCA really has taken the best of both organizations, and grown where growth is needed. A far cry from Daimler.

I'd almost say it was "a merger of equals"...

 

When GM terminated the Volt program, they canned a number of engineering and development people connected with the program as well. FCA was able to bring some of them aboard. Auburn Hills has a respectable vehicle electrification development team working there and FCA also has another set of people in Europe.

The nearby Chevy dealer has a number of Bolts lined up in the front row. They also have a bunch in the back lot behind the dealership. They're selling a few Bolts around here, because I see them on the road. However, the Bolt is tiny, a Fiat 500X would overshadow the Bolt if one parked them next to each other.

I see an occasional California compliance car hear in Frostbite Falls, MN. The problem with those BEV compliance cars is when the go off lease their value plummets since the lease rate for a new EV is priced so low. My apartment complex has four plug in spots. They are the standard three prong 120V outlets for connecting the block heater to an IC powered car. I could actually get away with having a Fiat 500e 10 months out of the year.

 

PS with all the criticism of GM...consider this...
look at their JD power ratings and also Consumer Reports reliability ratings and then compare to FCA on the same metrics. While these numbers can always be disputed, they are doing better, by a lot than FCA on these ratings. The problem for them is not building better vehicles in terms of reliability, that they have done. Its building vehicles that people will buy over and over....

 

Yep, buying over and over. Market share once was 50%, where is it today? FCAs market share in the US has remained relatively steady. If people here want to cheer GM feel free to do that at a GM forum.

 

At one time it was 51% and they were talking about splitting off Chevrolet because they alone had 25% I think. BUT that was a LONG time ago (1970-71)

 

I think the talk of splitting off Chevrolet was even earlier like late 1950s-early 1960s. We could wonder what if Chevrolet was splitted off from GM?

 

Doesn't make for excuses. Chrysler's market share at that time was somewhere near where it's at now. Even with everything they have been through, they haven't peed market share away like GM has. I'm not sure where their bottom is. And they didn't do themselves any favors closing US plants after taking billions in tax money. They currently build an SUV in China, sold here, that could've went to Lordstown, and the Blazer, built in Mexico, could be as well. That's disgraceful.

 

Doesn't make for excuses. Chrysler's market share at that time was somewhere near where it's at now. Even with everything they have been through, they haven't peed market share away like GM has. I'm not sure where their bottom is. And they didn't do themselves any favors closing US plants after taking billions in tax money. They currently build an SUV in China, sold here, that could've went to Lordstown, and the Blazer, built in Mexico, could be as well. That's disgraceful.

This, one thousand times over.

 

I have been baffled by the lack of American auto leadership in the D3 ? Just what kind of leaders are America;s schools of higher learning turning out ? GM jumped into Red China for the quick profits. And in the process taught their 51% partners the latest methods for building vehicles from the ground up ! Did anyone really think the Red Chinese wouldn't use what they learned to develop their own auto industry ? This transfer of $ BILLIONS worth of technology was what had been a closely guarded secret.
Chrysler was sold to Daimler then to FIAT because American schooled CEO's couldn't figure out how to do long term planning ? Chairman Lee was the last American CEO to make Chrysler profitable and keep it running as such.
FORD had to poach a Boeing CEO to keep them from floundering. Even Billy Ford stated he was in over his head trying to run FORD , hence the Boeing answer !
The only reason the D3 are making $$$ is because there in a 25% import duty on any PU trucks entering the US ! I was shocked when the Chrysler execs allowed Toyota execs to tour my plant showing them everything. We employees where told no cameras or photos in the plant as our process's were trade secrets !
Just my bewildered 2 cents.

 

I was shocked when the Chrysler execs allowed Toyota execs to tour my plant showing them everything.

Maybe now Toyota should return the favor and let FCA execs tour THEIR plants to learn something about building reliable vehicles.

 

I guess then...we cannot hope for there to ever be a US based auto company...that is run like a Japanese company....

 

The problem with US automakers is the quarter to quarter approach.

Have a good quarter they declare a dividend. Money that could go to improving product and plants.

Have a bad quarter. They cut future product and plant upgrades.

No long term plans.

FCA is better than Daimler and Cebrus but still needs to look long term.

 

Interesting note.

AFAIK FCA has beaten Ford in August by a margin of around 6 thousand units.

 

Too bad the auto companies only report sales quarterly now. That was started by GM because the financial reporters kept pointing out how their market share was shrinking.

 

I think the current situation with a former giant and icon of the aircraft industry should be a real wake up call to captains of industry everywhere. You all know who I am talking about right? We used to say:
"if its not Boeing, I'm not going"
that sad story is replete with bad decisions...letting money manipulators over-ride engineers...flying in the face so to speak of their decades long history of engineering excellence. All for money, all for investors. Now the money manipulators and their minions have the blood of 346 people on their hands.

 

Maybe now Toyota should return the favor and let FCA execs tour THEIR plants to learn something about building reliable vehicles.

When I worked at the Foxboro Company, a world leader in industrial instrumentation and process control, I was shocked that we let Shimadzu, a 'partner', someone who built a sub-assembly for us, see our entire process for pressure transmitters. It was like we handed them everything, for no apparent reason and no benefit to us. And 20 years later, they are emerging as a force to be reckoned with in this and many industries.

 

Actually, some business schools do teach about long term planning and what is required for companies to be prosperous in the long run. Unfortunately, that all gets thrown out the window when the quarterly earnings report comes out and investors scream for a change in leadership.....unless you are Musk.

The problem is that unstable industries, like automotive, which have ups and downs, do not present the decade-long increase in share price that we see from Amazon, Apple, Microsoft and others in the tech sector. So ignorant investors want those style of gains in older manufacturing industries, like automotive.....which makes it more difficult to enact long-range plans.

The average tenure of a CEO at publicly traded company is 2 years. Since CEO salaries are political footballs and the majority of their actual income comes from stock options, is it any wonder why they take a short-term strategy over a long-term one?

That is why Marchionne squandered a golden opportunity. He had Elkann's backing and job security. If he wanted to create a long-term strategy with a focus on quality, reliability, etc, he could have done that.

But Marchionne and Elkann are all about quarterly returns on investment and reducing net debt to zero. The net debt zero is about eliminating the risk from lenders....one of the biggest is Exor. Once net debt reaches zero (which it has) the remaining lenders are assured of getting their money back if the whole enterprise fails.

So, you have Exor now with little risk and getting nice returns. Now that the risk is gone, there is no incentive for Exor to push FCA for quality improvements or long-term strategies. The only thing Exor cares about is higher and higher quarterly returns.

Exor has made clear that FCA's reliance on pickups and SUVs is the greatest threat to the company. But you will not see FCA change that course because that is where returns on investment are coming from right now.

In other words, they are going to ride the pickup/SUV wave as far as it takes them. Preparing for the end or change in that pickup/SUV wave is not important right now.

This is reality and it is not unique to FCA.

The slamming of SM by you is getting tiresome.

You could view his approach as short-term, but in reality, anyone could see that the Cash For Clunkers generated a huge artificial sales demand that was perfectly timed with him rescuing Chrysler, getting the funds to put out the Dart and gain control of the rest of the Chrysler money. But eliminating debt as he did was a smart thing, knowing there would be a downturn, and that they had best be prepared for it. It's what smart people do in their own personal finance - when they suspect a recession is coming, with higher interest rates, they wipe out debt as fast as they can, and reduce borrowing.

Agreed with the rest about CEOs and stock options. The pressure to perform short-term can override any personal desire or motivation to be in it for the long haul. Comply, or be replaced with someone who will.

 

First, I praised getting to Net Debt Zero. I praised reducing the use of fleets (which seems to have gone the other way now). I praised many things from FCA.

But if you think I will not remind everyone that SM wasted a golden opportunity to change the way both Fiat Group and Chrysler Corp are viewed, you are mistaken.

He was given a blank slate and instead of creating a real quality culture (instead of empty talk), he pushed workers to the brink of breaking (emergency mode) and drew stick figures on the blank slate.

All brands needed the quality focus. Instead, we got the quarterly focus....the cheap parts, the untested systems and the complete dismissal of customers and dealers.

As Norm said, SM was a financial wizard, but a lousy CEO. He did exactly what you and I agree upon is the typical CEO mistake....he focused on his stock options and short-term gains.

 

If that were true, he would not have stuck it out to his death. He would have cashed in as soon as the rest of the Chrysler money was available, then bailed.

 

I have to agree...about 1000%...the lack of long term planning and leadership from the "BIG 3" is really quite shocking...disgraceful...and the money that these poor CEOs make, even more shocking. I don't know what they are teaching in American universities business schools....but whatever it is...it's not working....or....they know exactly what they are doing....setting these companies up so they make a quick buck...a hasty exit....and they don't give a damn...what happens after they leave.....this is why.....they are where they are....and Toyota....and VW.....are NOT.....
Who would have thought....back in 1975 when VW was struggling to get the bugs (lol) worked out of the Rabbit....and a Toyota still rusted to bits in 5 winters....that they would be #s 1 and 2? I surely did not. But their managers....know what they are doing...and CARE ABOUT THE LONG TERM.....
maybe it goes beyond knowledge.....to ETHICS....and MORALS......

Its not just the auto industry. Look no further than retail. Toys 'R Us heavily leveraged to be purchased raided and the carcass tossed away. Then there's Sears/Kmart. In 2004 what does Kmart do after emerging from bankruptcy? Buy Sears. Now you have a mega retail and distribution network. Do you update cash registers, inventory management, or resurrect the Sears catalog online with in-store pickup during the subsequent 10 years? Nope they bought back their stock to inflate the price, spin off the real-estate into a separate company (which is controlled by Sears CEO, burden the stores with rent they never used to have to pay for. The result: Two of the country's biggest retailers practically dead. There's a widespread grab for short term gains over long term success all over the place. It's sad.