Allpar Forums banner

361 - 380 of 393 Posts

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
37,863 Posts
Stellantis has the advantage of multiple brands selling around the world via, often and soon: oftener, multibrand dealerships and mulibrand spares and service and logistics 'backend'.

Accordingly, no brand need be anything close to the respective commoditized 'full line up'.

Accordingly: dodge, now a somewhat decommoditized brand, will by 2025or later still have no more than 3 or 4 nameplates (with many variants), likewise with Alfa (3 or 4 globally plus 1 or 2 eurocentric small fwd models), maserati will have 4 or 5 at most.

Chrysler will have just 1or 2.

Scale economies via psa merger synergies and JEEP volumes(globally not just usa) andor sweating old amortized plants, powertrains, platitectures will ensure at a minimum no significant financial losses.
So funny - taking what should be a niche brand (Jeep) and making it the volume brand and taking what were volume brands (Dodge and Chrysler) and making them niche at best shows nothing other than a complete misunderstanding of the markets and "goodwill" of nameplates. What you end up with is a reduced image of all three brands:
1) People can't get anything in the Chrysler lineup other than a very old car or one minivan sold as four different models. Even Plymouth had a wider lineup when it was killed.Chrysler's brand image is dying.
2) The "boy racer" image Dodge is forced to portray kills any interest from someone looking for economy or safety in a vehicle.
3) People are forced to take the compromises that come with a Jeep including lower fuel economy and, sadly, often quality issues, that make many first time Jeep purchasers leave Jeep the next time they are in a market for a new vehicle.
So now we've taken three brands and weakened the image of each, for short term financial fluffing for a merger.
A lot of time and energy was spent forcing square pegs into round holes that could have been better spent improving product.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,709 Posts
So funny - taking what should be a niche brand (Jeep) and making it the volume brand and taking what were volume brands (Dodge and Chrysler) and making them niche at best shows nothing other than a complete misunderstanding of the markets and "goodwill" of nameplates. What you end up with is a reduced image of all three brands:
1) People can't get anything in the Chrysler lineup other than a very old car or one minivan sold as four different models. Even Plymouth had a wider lineup when it was killed.Chrysler's brand image is dying.
2) The "boy racer" image Dodge is forced to portray kills any interest from someone looking for economy or safety in a vehicle.
3) People are forced to take the compromises that come with a Jeep including lower fuel economy and, sadly, often quality issues, that make many first time Jeep purchasers leave Jeep the next time they are in a market for a new vehicle.
So now we've taken three brands and weakened the image of each, for short term financial fluffing for a merger.
A lot of time and energy was spent forcing square pegs into round holes that could have been better spent improving product.
Since it was so brilliant, I guess if he got his merger, Sergio would have taken Chevrolet and made it Corvette and Camaro only....Split the trucks off into GMC only....Try to turn Cadillac into a BMW fighter....Give Buick two vehicles only....Restart Hummer as the SUV brand.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,449 Posts
I don't disagree entirely.

As Bob Lutz has been saying lately: commoditization IS gonna get the brands themselves definitively, finally.

Accordingly the fca and now stellantis upcoming years are just low profitability 'buying time'.

One guesses the Agnellis will selloff their automotive business stakes and management control close to entirely in say 10 years' time. Except Ferrari (if ferrari can survive the neverending tsunami of sheer commoditization now accelerating due to cheap money/credit and electrification etc.)
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
37,863 Posts
Why act like "commoditization" is a bad word? It isn't - except to those companies who squandered their ability to compete in those markets.
Toyota is basically a commodity brand and does quite well in good times and bad. Their dominance in sedans is rapidly becoming a dominance in CUVs. And ever so slowly, they are encroaching on traditional "American" markets like pickup trucks and large SUVs.
 

·
Administrator
1974 Plymouth Valiant - 2013 Dodge Dart - 2013 Chrysler 300C
Joined
·
36,198 Posts
It's all kinda funny to consider that Dodge started out as a slow but mildly upscale, well-engineered car, and the mass of Chrysler’s early sales was in roughly the same market as Dodge, but with more power and more modern engineering (Chrysler was started ten years after Dodge Brothers)... Chrysler Corp was the last to do V8s.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,511 Posts
It's all kinda funny to consider that Dodge started out as a slow but mildly upscale, well-engineered car, and the mass of Chrysler’s early sales was in roughly the same market as Dodge, but with more power and more modern engineering (Chrysler was started ten years after Dodge Brothers)... Chrysler Corp was the last to do V8s.
They really got their modern identities from 1960-1984 with the creation of the D3 compact. Plymouth's best seller in the '60s was the Valiant, Dodge the Coronet, Chrysler the Newport.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,701 Posts
one minivan sold as four different models
I've recently read where they are no longer qualifying the hybrids as separate models, so it's really now treated as 2 different models, I think. At least that's technically accurate, since at least the Voyager has different - OG RU sheet metal.
Why act like "commoditization" is a bad word? It isn't - except to those companies who squandered their ability to compete in those markets.
Toyota is basically a commodity brand and does quite well in good times and bad. Their dominance in sedans is rapidly becoming a dominance in CUVs. And ever so slowly, they are encroaching on traditional "American" markets like pickup trucks and large SUVs.
If you're Toyota, you can be a commodity brand because you have a solid reputation. Until Stellantis can say the same, being a commodity brand in its stable is a distinct liability. Commodities are fungible. Uniquely positioned brands are not.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
37,863 Posts
I've recently read where they are no longer qualifying the hybrids as separate models, so it's really now treated as 2 different models, I think. At least that's technically accurate, since at least the Voyager has different - OG RU sheet metal.
chrysler.com lists 4 models for Chrysler in the US: Pacifica, Pacifica Hybrid, 300, Voyager. But thye've always been hypocritical in that they never provided sales figures for the hybrid separately.
If you're Toyota, you can be a commodity brand because you have a solid reputation. Until Stellantis can say the same, being a commodity brand in its stable is a distinct liability. Commodities are fungible. Uniquely positioned brands are not.
So what percentage of the market are you willing to give up? You know the CUV market is already a commodity market and the small Jeeps aren't doing well against Toyota. Is it time to further shrink because those margins are likely shrinking fast? Or is it time to make a really serious effort to prove that Stellantis can offer quality products, even in lower margin segments? Will Stellantis fall for the old "shrink your way to success" plan and abandon more market segments?
This whole "margin" over "volume" argument that FCA's minions put forth in the past is a fallacy. Unless you are Ferrari, you need volume to get margins.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,701 Posts
chrysler.com lists 4 models for Chrysler in the US: Pacifica, Pacifica Hybrid, 300, Voyager. But thye've always been hypocritical in that they never provided sales figures for the hybrid separately.

Well, for one, the way I read your comment, you stated RU was 4 models. That Chrysler's website displays the RU as 3 distinct lines, is more just the nature of building a public facing marketing page on the web.
So what percentage of the market are you willing to give up? You know the CUV market is already a commodity market and the small Jeeps aren't doing well against Toyota. Is it time to further shrink because those margins are likely shrinking fast? Or is it time to make a really serious effort to prove that Stellantis can offer quality products, even in lower margin segments? Will Stellantis fall for the old "shrink your way to success" plan and abandon more market segments?
This whole "margin" over "volume" argument that FCA's minions put forth in the past is a fallacy. Unless you are Ferrari, you need volume to get margins.
Did I suggest anything about giving up or not working in the "commodity" market? I made a statement of fact with respect to Toyota's position vs Stellantis'.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
37,863 Posts
Did I suggest anything about giving up or not working in the "commodity" market? I made a statement of fact with respect to Toyota's position vs Stellantis'.
You said it was a liability to be in that market. That implies it's a bad thing to be there.
I see it as a missed (again and again) opportunity. At some point, you've got to make a stand or FCA becomes Challenger, Wrangler, Gladiator, and nothing else. Any sedan of any size and any CUV/SUV market is already heading there. Even the pickup truck market experiences that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,709 Posts
As the auto industry migrates to electrification and then into autonomous driving, vehicles will become more and more commoditized. Unique vehicles will be reserved for the wealthy who can afford the high prices.

Any company that cannot compete in a commoditized market will go away.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jimboy and David S

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,449 Posts
Not if....they merge!;-)

And/Or export to usa andor europe from, where else but...china.

See the visionary yet utterly obvious if not also necessary (in the long run!) Merger with not mere psa but (a) gm (b) renault and via renault: nissan as second best.

The stellantis merger does NOT truly solve this 'insolvent due to commoditization with high risk adjusted cost base and not enough scale economies' deep historic problem for usa auto manufacturing firms/brands. Witness Ford's existential crisis currently underway.

Hopefully solves it in europe, though, albeit only also via large public monies/subsidies.

The ghost of Marchionne's confessions of a capital junkie still haunts!!
 

·
Administrator
1974 Plymouth Valiant - 2013 Dodge Dart - 2013 Chrysler 300C
Joined
·
36,198 Posts
Marchionne made it a self-fulfilling prophecy to some degree.

Notice that Fiat took the attitude of “we do no badge engineering at all” and Peugeot said “Let's do a lot of badge engineering, but we'll do it right!” — and see who made more money.

There was nothing stopping Lancia from having a series of upscale Fiats as well as the slow-selling (not really suited to Europe) upscale Chryslers. (I think the upscaled Chrysler too much for Lancia, too.)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,511 Posts
Marchionne made it a self-fulfilling prophecy to some degree.

Notice that Fiat took the attitude of “we do no badge engineering at all” and Peugeot said “Let's do a lot of badge engineering, but we'll do it right!” — and see who made more money.

There was nothing stopping Lancia from having a series of upscale Fiats as well as the slow-selling (not really suited to Europe) upscale Chryslers. (I think the upscaled Chrysler too much for Lancia, too.)
Look at Lancia sales, over 300K in Europe in 1990, over 200K in 1991/92 and not over 100K since 2009.

Thema 357K Croma (Type Four)
Prisma 387K Delta (Beta/Ritmo)
Dedra 418K Tempra (Type Three)
Beta 425K Fiat engines, inspired configuration
Delta 525K Beta/Ritmo, Tipo (Type Two)
Ypsilon III 520K Panda (Mini)
Ypsilon II 543K Punto
Ypsilon I 803K Punto
Y10 1.1 Million Panda

All the good selling more recent Lancias shared platforms with Fiats, the older Beta/Delta/Prism shared engines and layout.


Alfa looks similar, over 200K in Europe in 1990, then nothing over 100K since 2011.


All all the good selling Fiat era Alfas were on modified Fiat platforms;

Alfasud 1 million Pre Fiat
33 1 million Pre Fiat
156 680K Long wheelbase Marea (Type 2 Rev 3)
147 650K Marea (Type 2)
Giulia 500K Pre Fiat
Alfetta 500K Pre Fiat
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,701 Posts
That implies it's a bad thing to be there.
That's not an accurate representation of what I said - and I gave STLA an avenue "Until Stellantis can say the same (has a solid rep like Toyota)...". That's you reading into it what you THINK I meant. What I said merely IMPLIES only that it's problematic and you darn well better do a solid SWOT analysis, etc., and work from that and other pertinent data, build your strategy, and act accordingly. That may not take you where you think it should. TOYOTA can do as it wishes in the "commodity market" for obvious reasons. STELLANTIS has its work cut out for it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,701 Posts
Any company that cannot compete in a commoditized market will go away.
That's not in question. What's in question is who will survive in the long run. If Stellantis can't get somewhere near Toyota's reputation, and be in the upper tiers of auto manufacturers in that respect, then maintain that status, it's going to be on the bubble, IMHO.
 

·
Jeepaholic
Joined
·
5,896 Posts
Any company or brand can succeed in a given market segment if they are willing to invest the time, money, resources, etc in order to get there, and be willing to maintain it over time in order to build the reputation. The top players in the "commodity" market didn't get there over night, they did their due diligence, over time to get there and stay there.

And no offense to anyone here, but referring to automobiles as commodities is just ridiculous. Commodities are resources, cars are manufactured products. Business-speak is all about the latest catch phrase or term, and people make big bucks pedaling this BS, but for the most part it's just recycled nonsense...IMO.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,709 Posts
That's not in question. What's in question is who will survive in the long run. If Stellantis can't get somewhere near Toyota's reputation, and be in the upper tiers of auto manufacturers in that respect, then maintain that status, it's going to be on the bubble, IMHO.
I do not think anyone disagrees with you. The company will not succeed in niche markets without a dedication to quality.

The future players in electrification must delivery quality. The survivors of any new technologies require quality. Look how many cellular phone manufacturers died.

The companies who do electrification on the cheap will be cast aside quickly.

Then, get into the commodity market (appliances) and quality has always been important there, as you said.

I said it on the first day, it is nice to see Stellantis with a proper, brand-focused leader who is dedicated to running an auto company. But if they do not improve the cheap FCA quality, the branding will fail.
 

·
Administrator
1974 Plymouth Valiant - 2013 Dodge Dart - 2013 Chrysler 300C
Joined
·
36,198 Posts
All the good selling more recent Lancias shared platforms with Fiats, the older Beta/Delta/Prism shared engines and layout.
...

All all the good selling Fiat era Alfas were on modified Fiat platforms;
Which shows that Peugeot had the right idea, and to a degree so did Chrysler. Chrysler's main issue was being cheap with the tuning, but even so, before the 2008 minivans, a Dodge would have a sport suspension standard while a Plymouth and Chrysler had a comfort suspension. They were sorting things out before Daimler. Again, to go back to Gale, Plymouth would have the advanced cars (e.g. aluminum) first, with their retromodern styling from Prowler and Plymouth-Truck Cruiser; Chrysler would be the same as it was under Olivier, namely, inexpensive comfort and style; and Dodge would be a sportier version of both. Styling was to have been unique to each one, even if it meant spending more on stampings and, yes, dashboards.

That is not too far from the Opel/Peugeot/Citroën/DS setup.

In theory they could go back to that in the US. Cheap cars go to Fiat, rather than Plymouth; mainstream to Chrysler; sporty to Dodge; premium to Alfa Romeo and perhaps Maserati. Same basic car, multiple brands.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,449 Posts
@Zagnut27

Fca is awesome at commoditized cars via a commoditized brand.....in Brazil/latam. Because they have the scale economies, the cost structure, the subsidies from governments, etc. They more than earn their cost of capital over several business cycles in that part of the world.

However the same has NOT been true in europe nor in the usa. It is NOT about the willingness to invest over long stretches of time. It is (a) the paucity of time (b) and elevated cost structure and (c) in many cases severe deficits of scale economies.

I.e., cannot earn cost of capital over a full business cycle.

Ie., do not have luxury of longterm, since it would'v been dead by then or....merged. Contrary to the moralizing on allpar daimler occupation or not: chrysler corp was necessarily prone to bankruptcy (ie not earning cost of capital over full market cycle , running out of time and money). As was gm. As is ford. As was fiat group before marchionne in 2004. As was PSA before french govt bailout and one by a chinese state firm 'investor' just a few years ago, etc.
 
361 - 380 of 393 Posts
Top