Allpar Forums banner

21 - 40 of 65 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,389 Posts
MoparNorm said:
???
Renault provided the seed money for XJ, and as such, created the rebirth of the SUV segment, which before that was only Jeep and a handful of International Harvesters.
The Alliance started the entire move by AMC and later Chrysler to smaller, fuel efficient cars. Several Renault managers stayed at AMC, when Renault left. Far from bad results.
How was the fiscal health under the French??
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,452 Posts
JRS200x said:
I don't really remember to be honest, but how long did it take before the "merger of equals" started to show it was something quite different? I can't imagine from day 1, at least to the public, that there was all angst and a ohmigodwhatdidwedo feeling...
I don't know the exact date for me to realize this but for a circa Y2K cartoon satire that I read in the a news paper which depicted a horse (with the name "Chrysler" being ridden by one of the name "Daimler" off a precipice. The caption under the cartoon showed the rider blaming the horse for their impending doom.....

Does anyone else remember such a cartoon and/or more specifics?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
649 Posts
I think it's relatively safe to say the jury is still out on the "Fiat/Chrysler" merger. I think the Pentastar was on the drawing board long before the Fiat takeover; Chrysler brand is in need of product; Dodge still does not have a Focus/Corolla competitor, ie no Neon replacement, (the Dart does not fit that bill); Chrysler/Dodge may lose one of the mini-vans, which had been their big cash cow for quite some time and they are just letting that category which they once dominated, slowly die; the 3.6 is used in almost every vehicle Chrysler makes but suddenly they need two V-6s within 15 ci size of each other; they had a chance to use the gear packs from the 66 transmission for their 1/2 tons, instead they took the cheap route and let the 545 morph into the 65, which is really still a glorified 4-speed; they needed the Ram brand like a hole in the head, same for SRT; the new Cherokee is generating a ton of hate mail, etc etc. Are they doing some good things? Absolutely they are, but IMO they're also making a lot of mistakes which is cause for concern. Especially when you read about how in general, future Chrysler Corp products may/are being cancelled at the same time as there are rumors of bringing more Fiat scrap metal to this continent. (Ooooohh, that Fiat scrap metal comment could generate a ton of hate mail....)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,600 Posts
willy said:
I think it's relatively safe to say the jury is still out on the "Fiat/Chrysler" merger. I think the Pentastar was on the drawing board long before the Fiat takeover; Chrysler brand is in need of product; Dodge still does not have a Focus/Corolla competitor, ie no Neon replacement, (the Dart does not fit that bill); Chrysler/Dodge may lose one of the mini-vans, which had been their big cash cow for quite some time and they are just letting that category which they once dominated, slowly die; the 3.6 is used in almost every vehicle Chrysler makes but suddenly they need two V-6s within 15 ci size of each other; they had a chance to use the gear packs from the 66 transmission for their 1/2 tons, instead they took the cheap route and let the 545 morph into the 65, which is really still a glorified 4-speed; they needed the Ram brand like a hole in the head, same for SRT; the new Cherokee is generating a ton of hate mail, etc etc. Are they doing some good things? Absolutely they are, but IMO they're also making a lot of mistakes which is cause for concern. Especially when you read about how in general, future Chrysler Corp products may/are being cancelled at the same time as there are rumors of bringing more Fiat scrap metal to this continent. (Ooooohh, that Fiat scrap metal comment could generate a ton of hate mail....)
Yup, at this point in the Daimler reign of terror, we were basking in 300 and Charger popularity and the return of RWD.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,474 Posts
willy said:
I think it's relatively safe to say the jury is still out on the "Fiat/Chrysler" merger.
ROFLMAO! After reading this sentence one needs not to worry about the rest.
Yes, the last four years sure have been an up-and-down...oh wait, it's only gone up; WAY up. The only jury that's still out is the one in your head.
But as you said, Cerberus and DBAG could have just as easily done the same apparently. Sure, obviously.

We get it, you don't like FIAT just because and you like to flame discussion with your nonsense. Whatever, move on; your life isn't over yet, get out and enjoy it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,727 Posts
^^ :rolleyes:

For myself, I could care less about "foreign" ownership. Foreign is a relative term that is steadily falling down the ladder to an antiquated status. Where I work, the ownership is 1000 miles away where they speaks strange words like y'all and complain about the cold. 100 miles away is Canada where they speak french, just like a portion of the local population. Who's more foreign now?
 
  • Like
Reactions: jimboy

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,094 Posts
tryphon said:
As long as manufacturing is retained in the Countries of origin at the same level as at the time of the acquisition and as long as the new owners invest in expanding the available markets, then there is little harm done, other than to one’s national pride and often there are many positive aspects as far as investments and growth.
Careful now, this is an argument similar to the one we frequently hear from those who want Volkswagen to take over Alfa Romeo ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
822 Posts
Discussion Starter #29
Lampredi said:
Careful now, this is an argument similar to the one we frequently hear from those who want Volkswagen to take over Alfa Romeo ;)
Mine is a generic statement: foreign ownership of any company is considered more acceptable if it does not affect local employment in a negative way. (I did get your smiley..just want to make sure everyone understands)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,389 Posts
willy said:
Dodge still does not have a Focus/Corolla competitor, ie no Neon replacement, (the Dart does not fit that bill);
HUH, AHHHH, HUH, WHAT?

Driven a Focus and Dart back to back and I have no idea what your talking about. Besides not being POS like a aging Corolla, the Dart is nearly dead on the Focus except for more knee room in the back seat.

Fiat's management has taken the company from the Coffin to the Penthouse in 4 short years but yeah, I think the verdict is still out, Someone slipped into Sergio's room last week and gave him lobotomy and all his decision from now on will be failures.
 

·
Vaguely badass...
Joined
·
43,887 Posts
willy said:
Dodge still does not have a Focus/Corolla competitor, ie no Neon replacement, (the Dart does not fit that bill);
Because...why?
willy said:
Chrysler/Dodge may lose one of the mini-vans, which had been their big cash cow for quite some time and they are just letting that category which they once dominated, slowly die;
That minivan segment as a whole was shrinking for quite some time.
willy said:
the 3.6 is used in almost every vehicle Chrysler makes but suddenly they need two V-6s within 15 ci size of each other;
Not suddenly - it's been in the plan for some time how.
willy said:
they had a chance to use the gear packs from the 66 transmission for their 1/2 tons, instead they took the cheap route and let the 545 morph into the 65, which is really still a glorified 4-speed;
If it meets the requirements, where's the problem? Saving money was a pretty big deal since, you know, they DID go bankrupt.
willy said:
they needed the Ram brand like a hole in the head, same for SRT; the new Cherokee is generating a ton of hate mail, etc etc.
So, they've made decisions that others question - and that automatically makes them bad decisions?
willy said:
Are they doing some good things? Absolutely they are, but IMO they're also making a lot of mistakes which is cause for concern. Especially when you read about how in general, future Chrysler Corp products may/are being cancelled at the same time as there are rumors of bringing more Fiat scrap metal to this continent. (Ooooohh, that Fiat scrap metal comment could generate a ton of hate mail....)
Ah..and THERE comes the real take-away. You don't like Fiat, you obviously don't like Fiat being in control of Chrysler, and you're not interested in seeing the successes over what you perceive are failures.

All you had to do was say that from the start. Then expectations would be properly set.
 
T

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Even though I hate their Nascar decision, I believe they are well on their way now. As long as the Italians don't forget that this is an American car company.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,600 Posts
Trailduster45 said:
Even though I hate their Nascar decision, I believe they are well on their way now. As long as the Italians don't forget that this is an American car company.
...and if Marchionne were here, he would say that you should not forget that this is now an International car company.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
3,813 Posts
willy said:
Dodge still does not have a Focus/Corolla competitor, ie no Neon replacement, (the Dart does not fit that bill);
Huh? How is the Dart not a competitor to the Focus/Corolla? Not even going to read the rest of your paragraph if thats how you start it, something tells me you have a grudge somewhere...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
822 Posts
Discussion Starter #37
DaveAdmin said:
I think it's about time we moved this to off-topic, because the original post is more an opinion on the wonders of globalization than a specific Chrysler post.
That was not the intention of my original post. I wanted to gauge the general feelings about foreign ownership vs. the likely disappearance of our favorite car company. It was specifically aimed at what happened/is happening to Chrysler.
 

·
Active Jeeper
Joined
·
31,129 Posts
tryphon said:
That was not the intention of my original post. I wanted to gauge the general feelings about foreign ownership vs. the likely disappearance of our favorite car company.
This is now a Jeep Thread???

;)
 

·
Vaguely badass...
Joined
·
43,887 Posts
Let's say for argument's sake that, once the companies are officially combined - they move the HQ to Auburn Hills. Does that change some opinions?

Now let's say they move it to Turin. Better or worse?
 

·
Active Jeeper
Joined
·
31,129 Posts
Stratuscaster said:
Let's say for argument's sake that, once the companies are officially combined - they move the HQ to Auburn Hills. Does that change some opinions?Now let's say they move it to Turin. Better or worse?
A good example, is CNH. Regional headquarters remain, combined headquarters moved to a neutral, low tax location.
That is likely the model for a Fiat/Chrysler, Chrysler in Auburn Hill, Fiat in Turin and the new HQ in a neutral, low tax location, with minimal, administrative operations housed there.
 
21 - 40 of 65 Posts
Top