Allpar Forums banner

161 - 180 of 393 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
67 Posts
Это груз конского навоза. Из вчерашней презентации мы узнали, что FCA инвестировала около 27 миллиардов долларов в новый продукт в период с 2018 по 2020 год… и очень мало продуктов для этого. Эти инвестиции должны были привести к появлению двузначного числа совершенно новых продуктов.
The new Grand Cherokee looks like a great product. There will still be new products and versions.
FCA did a great job. They were able to increase their market share from 9% to 12% (2009-2020). Over the same period, GM's share fell from 19.5% to 17.3%.
The average transaction price is higher than GM. The high average transaction price indicates that people are willing to pay for an FCA product. FCA was a profitable company, it goes to Stellantis in good condition.
Now everything depends on the decisions of Tavares.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,692 Posts
The new Grand Cherokee looks like a great product. There will still be new products and versions.
FCA did a great job. They were able to increase their market share from 9% to 12% (2009-2020). Over the same period, GM's share fell from 19.5% to 17.3%.
The average transaction price is higher than GM. The high average transaction price indicates that people are willing to pay for an FCA product. FCA was a profitable company, it goes to Stellantis in good condition.
Now everything depends on the decisions of Tavares.
Yes, it looks great when you pick and choose the data you like.

Historically, Chrysler has had about a 12% to 13% market share.....prior to 2009.

So FCA did nothing to actually grow the company's market share. It just replaced Chrysler and Dodge share with Jeep and Ram.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,951 Posts
Yes, it looks great when you pick and choose the data you like.

Historically, Chrysler has had about a 12% to 13% market share.....prior to 2009.

So FCA did nothing to actually grow the company's market share. It just replaced Chrysler and Dodge share with Jeep and Ram.
And when you get rid of all lower end vehicles and more than double sales of more expensive trucks, your average transaction price is naturally going to increase.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,692 Posts
You're right. But is it easy to sell many more expensive trucks? This is what everyone wants.
No, it is not "what everyone wants". It is just the thickest part of the market currently.

Sedans still account for 25% of the North American market.

The problem with chasing SUVs and pickups is that it creates nice margins and reliance on gas guzzlers. Then as soon as fuel prices spike, people leave the trucks and SUVs and the company goes bankrupt.....repeat of 2009.

A company must develop a diverse portfolio. Toyota transaction prices are not high because they sell from low to high and have solid market share. When customers switch from sedans to SUVs or back to sedans, Toyota is covered and has products that people trust.

FCA did nothing to change Chrysler's dependence on SUVs and pickups. In fact, they made it worse.

Then, FCA increased margins by squeezing suppliers, resulting in more defects....another way to damage the brands.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
67 Posts
Then as soon as fuel prices spike, people leave the trucks and SUVs and the company goes bankrupt.....repeat of 2009.
Electrification is already underway. And sedans will already be hybrid and electric models. FCA did the right thing by not investing big money in small petrol platforms.
Stellantis will be able to regain its position in the light segments. But in heavy segments they would not have been able to.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,692 Posts
As fuel prices spike people will start buying smaller SUVs and electro cars.
Yes, and Stellantis will not have those hybrids in North America for another five years because FCA did nothing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: David S and UN4GTBL

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,692 Posts
FCA did the right thing by not investing big money in small petrol platforms.
Wrong again.

What is SUSW, CUSW? Small petrol platforms.

What is the GME engines? Small displacement engines for small platforms.

FCA just built a plant in Italy for small engines.

The 2.0T will be built in the US.

That is investment in small petrol engines and platforms.
 
  • Like
Reactions: David S

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,236 Posts
I don't understand all of this griping about Alfa. FCA and Stellantis needed a brand capable of world wide name recognition to compete at the Audi, BMW, MB, level and Alfa was the only real choice they had, Lancia and Chrysler have both been tainted with decades of inferior management, Maserati is known mostly for Luxury sporting cars that aren't terribly reliable and expensive to maintain. Alfa has a racing history, broad appeal, and can hit the necessary price points for financial success, in fact the only real contender for the segment. FCA has spent billions developing engineering for the Brand, and you want them to throw that away like the Dart, 200, etc..?
I see no conflict between Chrysler , Dodge, Alfa, or Lancia, or DS, they should all end up on similar architecture with different missions. If Alfa is handled correctly going forward, it should be very profitable for Stellantis, a true BMW competitor. Leave the large MB's to Maserati, and Dodge and Chrysler can handle the American need for size and speed. Mostly, they need to fix their dealerships, quantity and service to compete with the European brands. I will NEVER purchase a car from a Dealership that is 200 miles away from me, and I live in a city of more than a million people, just saying.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,692 Posts
I don't understand all of this griping about Alfa. FCA and Stellantis needed a brand capable of world wide name recognition to compete at the Audi, BMW, MB, level and Alfa was the only real choice they had, Lancia and Chrysler have both been tainted with decades of inferior management, Maserati is known mostly for Luxury sporting cars that aren't terribly reliable and expensive to maintain. Alfa has a racing history, broad appeal, and can hit the necessary price points for financial success, in fact the only real contender for the segment. FCA has spent billions developing engineering for the Brand, and you want them to throw that away like the Dart, 200, etc..?
I see no conflict between Chrysler , Dodge, Alfa, or Lancia, or DS, they should all end up on similar architecture with different missions. If Alfa is handled correctly going forward, it should be very profitable for Stellantis, a true BMW competitor. Leave the large MB's to Maserati, and Dodge and Chrysler can handle the American need for size and speed. Mostly, they need to fix their dealerships, quantity and service to compete with the European brands. I will NEVER purchase a car from a Dealership that is 200 miles away from me, and I live in a city of more than a million people, just saying.
I agree that Alfa should not be thrown away. I think Alfa needs to go back to the drawing board (once again) and get a real brand identity. Under FCA, the Alfa brand was horribly abused with restyled fwd Fiats, then quality-plagued rwd Giorgios.

Also, Alfa will NEVER be a true competitor to Audi, BMW and MB. It just does not have the chops. It will eat around the edges of those brands, but never be ranked up among them. Besides, Alfa is going back to fwd under Stellantis. Unless they offer a full AWD lineup like Audi, it will not compete with RWD BMW and MBs.

Maserati has a chance to attack Audi, BMW and MB from the higher price side. But it will never be ranked as a full competitor.

Lexus, Infiniti, Acura and Genesis are also in this field with a huge head start. Infiniti and Acura are having troubles because they lost their brand focus. Lexus is stabilizing itself with lots of new product coming. Genesis is taking the slow approach, but its new SUVs have created some excitement for the brand.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
67 Posts
Yes, and Stellantis will not have those hybrids in North America for another five years because FCA did nothing.
I don’t mean to say that you are wrong. You're right. But your situation is perfect. In reality, in 2009, two bankrupts merged into one company.
There weren't many companies to pick up the dead Chrysler. Toyota or VAG was not listed for auction.
You want them to build a dream company in 10 years. This does not happen. And so they did a fantastic job.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
37,852 Posts
I don’t mean to say that you are wrong. You're right. But your situation is perfect. In reality, in 2009, two bankrupts merged into one company.
There weren't many companies to pick up the dead Chrysler. Toyota or VAG was not listed for auction.
You want them to build a dream company in 10 years. This does not happen. And so they did a fantastic job.
Fantastic? No. It was a company that squeezed suppliers and dealers for margins in North America while failing to properly invest in future products (while accepting low margins in other geographic areas). It was a short term strategy to make things attractive for a sale/merger (the same basic behavior everyone crucified Cerberus for).
Now the problem is almost every legacy FCA brand needs to be "reborn". Past delayed costs are soon to be current expense.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,692 Posts
Fantastic? No. It was a company that squeezed suppliers and dealers for margins in North America while failing to properly invest in future products (while accepting low margins in other geographic areas). It was a short term strategy to make things attractive for a sale/merger (the same basic behavior everyone crucified Cerberus for).
Now the problem is almost every legacy FCA brand needs to be "reborn". Past delayed costs are soon to be current expense.
At least Cerberus started to improve the Daimler interiors, continued and launched the Pentastar and Grand Cherokee, created the Unlimited Lifetime Powertrain Warranty and the Customer Advisory Board.

They did some cheap things and got rightly burned for it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
67 Posts
Fantastic? No. It was a company that squeezed suppliers and dealers for margins in North America while failing to properly invest in future products (while accepting low margins in other geographic areas). It was a short term strategy to make things attractive for a sale/merger (the same basic behavior everyone crucified Cerberus for).
Now the problem is almost every legacy FCA brand needs to be "reborn". Past delayed costs are soon to be current expense.
Why didn't GM invest in Pontiac, Oldsmobile, Saturn? Why didn't Ford invest in Mercury? Buick is becoming more and more Chinese. SM couldn't kill Chrysler and Dodge just because he was a foreigner and didn't want to look bad in the eyes of the Americans. GM and Ford had no such problems.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,692 Posts
Why didn't GM invest in Pontiac, Oldsmobile, Saturn? Why didn't Ford invest in Mercury? Buick is becoming more and more Chinese. SM couldn't kill Chrysler and Dodge just because he was a foreigner and didn't want to look bad in the eyes of the Americans. GM and Ford had no such problems.
SM was prepared to jettison Chrysler and Dodge if he achieved his corruptly orchestrated merger with GM.
 
161 - 180 of 393 Posts
Top