[Dave Z]

I agree it was taken out of context. I don't think that's what he meant. He certainly has said in the past that he is de-emphasizing the Fiat brand and pushing the individual model families that are popular. I suspect it's a matter of marketing, e.g. "Buy the new 500L!" instead of "Buy the new Fiat Bronchea!"

Likewise, we know Chrysler 300 is being seen as a moderately separate brand now... so Chrysler is Plymouth with chrome but Chrysler 300 is moving up.

PS> With Fiat 500 matching standard-Mini sales, and 500L set to go up against Countryman, I don't think Fiat is a big failure here.

 

[Dave Z]

autoedizione. With all due respect, it's not exaclty the WSJ

Neither is the WSJ They've screwed up a few Chrysler reports in their time... not as badly as the NY Times though.

Side note, -- when the Three Musketeers fixed the problems of the Maxwell, Maxwell CEO Walter Chrysler started selling it as the “Good Maxwell.” It sold like hotcakes (keep in mind Maxwell was a major automaker in the day, they were #3 in the US in 1910). Then, whatever reason, Walter P. decided to drop the Maxwell name and took the unusual step of selling Maxwells as the Chrysler Four. It was not a good idea -- took the Chrysler rep down a notch -- and so a new brand, Plymouth, was created to house the Good Maxwell.

Plymouth is Maxwell renamed. Why? Who knows? In Allpar's own histories, creating Plymouth is reported as a major step and a big risk, but in reality, it was just the Maxwell, launched in 1913 and dramatically improved in 1923 or 1924 (not sure when they did the Good Maxwell routine). Not unlike Chrysler Sebring and 200, except that they kept the name the same at first and it worked.

But y'know what? So did calling it Plymouth and pretending it was “all new.” Enough was changed that it was pretty new, ... hydraulic brakes for a start.