Focus on building great, affordable products, market them like you did the 200 and keep the company growing... Enough of this New Coke talk. Keep it Classic...
Marchionne wants to axe Fiat and Chrysler brands?
From AutoEdizione:
Could there possibly be any truth to this? If so, that's nothing short of insane! But it does bring to mind the claim by the alleged FGA insider (with a pro-VW stance) Busso D.O.H.C about a year ago that "[Marchionne] is convinced he cannot recover fiat image in Europe, but for a tiny part. Here's where the 500 family starts and develops as a quasi-independent brand."
And then there's issue of the Chrysler brand, about which the linked article above says "Marchionne would have said that it’d be best to look for a ‘new’ brand with a portfolio full of new products." (I don't understand from that sentence whether Marchionne said this or not, the way it's written it sounds like the article writer just assumes that Marchionne "would have" said it, but it doesn't really make sense just to assume that out of the blue without him actually having said it...)
Read the whole thing here: "Marchionne possibly wants to replace car brands Fiat and Chrysler"Sergio Marchionne made a few remarkable – to say the least – statements yesterday. One of them was that the CEO is thinking about letting go of the brands Fiat and Chrysler in Europe and the US (not in Brazil and other emerging economies). The reason for which is that both brands are suffering from an image problem on these continents. This very strange ‘plan’ is, by the way, in line with the plans to expand the 500- and Panda-label. The fact that there are barely any Fiat-badges to be found on both the 500 as well as the Panda is a clear indication.
Could there possibly be any truth to this? If so, that's nothing short of insane! But it does bring to mind the claim by the alleged FGA insider (with a pro-VW stance) Busso D.O.H.C about a year ago that "[Marchionne] is convinced he cannot recover fiat image in Europe, but for a tiny part. Here's where the 500 family starts and develops as a quasi-independent brand."
And then there's issue of the Chrysler brand, about which the linked article above says "Marchionne would have said that it’d be best to look for a ‘new’ brand with a portfolio full of new products." (I don't understand from that sentence whether Marchionne said this or not, the way it's written it sounds like the article writer just assumes that Marchionne "would have" said it, but it doesn't really make sense just to assume that out of the blue without him actually having said it...)
21 - 40 of 41 Posts
Dana, I am right there with you..to be clear; I don't disagree. I apologize for being Captain Obvious, and did not want to imply the name change meant anything..perhaps I misunderstood; it sounded to me like you were saying RAM was a S.M. brainchild.
Correct me if I'm wrong..but the big idea was to separate Dodge trucks from Dodge cars. I think a similar move, was to separate high performance Dodges from low performance Dodges via SRT.
Correct me if I'm wrong..but the big idea was to separate Dodge trucks from Dodge cars. I think a similar move, was to separate high performance Dodges from low performance Dodges via SRT.
There are many people (insiders) that have argued for a long time that the "New Coke vs. Classic Coke" debacle was planned from the beginning.hmk123 said:Focus on building great, affordable products, market them like you did the 200 and keep the company growing... Enough of this New Coke talk. Keep it Classic...
At no time in the history of marketing has there ever been a product that got that much free advertising for that long. ...AAAAAAND then, Coke Classic hits the shelves, and the free hype continued. Anyone that thinks Coke Classic was planned AFTER new Coke was intro'd, needs serious help. It wasn't a debacle, it was genius, and now THIRTY years later it still gets mileage (oddly, I now want a Coke).
Overall I agree with you, though. Design it right, build it better, and have good marketing, and it will sell. Nothing is so wrong with a company, that good product, can't fix it, or make a good company better.
I agree with Dave, though, specifically about the stupid article, though. Just a blogger filling a word count, so the ad slimes can sell ad space around it.
Any chance the article was written by the same guy who just botched the financial report on yahoo? 
Ram being separated from Dodge was during the same time Dodge was being though of as a dump name, too, there just was too much Chrysler/Dodge overlap and it was an idea. No reason why the Ram portion had to stick in my opinion, Chevy and Ford both have cars and trucks that are associated with each other without a problem, so it was just "a move".BASONE88 said:Dana, I am right there with you..to be clear; I don't disagree. I apologize for being Captain Obvious, and did not want to imply the name change meant anything..perhaps I misunderstood; it sounded to me like you were saying RAM was a S.M. brainchild.
Correct me if I'm wrong..but the big idea was to separate Dodge trucks from Dodge cars. I think a similar move, was to separate high performance Dodges from low performance Dodges via SRT.
As far as SRT goes, once the RWD was finally reintroduced after 15 or so FWD only cars, several years into RWD 300 Chrysler, then charger Sedan, and Magnum, SRT was started as, "We can build a Street, Race and Track car that will outperform a car twice its price", which it did for the first couple years. SRT in the first couple years did just that, along with the SRT-4 Neon (but couldn't call it a Neon, it had a bad name to it and they didn't want to hurt the image or some BS like that), and it was/is a very potent 4 cylinder FWD SRT going for around $20K. It wasn't until about the fourth year of SRT that prices went a little too high to have real impact. Still nice cars, lost track of its purpose for a bit, but still a good program, but not to take away from the Chrysler, Dodge, or Jeep to delineate them low or high performance only.
As far as the Classic Coke goes, possible. Problem is, it seems there are a few too many of these little rumors that keep coming true, and I don't think it is the best thing for the company name (if nothing else). She still maintains that 11 percent volume domestically, why chance losing that? As far as a Coke Classic, yes, nothing but, and with lots of ice and a little bit of rum (it's a Navy thing for me).
It's August 1st, Not April 1st.
Bad Joke.
TMD
Bad Joke.
TMD
Oh jeez, now it's chrysler and fiat's turn...gimme a break will ya. Just to put this "rumor" in perspective, here's what Kuniskis had to say abot that other ridiculous - yet recurring - rumor about Dodge disapperaring and yaddayaddayadda: http://wardsauto.com/management-amp-strategy/growing-dodge-customer-base-one-model-time
I'll add a simple comment; you read that on...autoedizione. With all due respect, it's not exaclty the WSJ (mmh, don't know if that actually means anything nowadays)
I'll add a simple comment; you read that on...autoedizione. With all due respect, it's not exaclty the WSJ (mmh, don't know if that actually means anything nowadays)
Apparently, the source is the following article: "Marchionne: addio marchio Fiat?". (AutoEdizione, unfortunately, has a bad habit of not providing the sources of the information they post.)
But yes, it does sound far-fetched, although I believe Marchionne is more than capable of making asinine brand or product decisions...
But yes, it does sound far-fetched, although I believe Marchionne is more than capable of making asinine brand or product decisions...
Let's play a little game of "Fill in the Blank." See if you can correctly fill
in each correct missing automotive brand name or the appropriate word:
1. (__________) Viper
2. (__________) RAM 1500
3. (__________) SRT Charger
4. (__________) SRT Challenger
5. (__________) RAM ProMaster
6. (__________) Dakota
7. (__________) Ball
8. (__________) a bullet
9. Roger (________)-er
10. "That's my (___________)"
11. (___________)/(___________) Trucks
12. The 2012 Nascar Manufacturers Championship
Winner is: (____________)
in each correct missing automotive brand name or the appropriate word:
1. (__________) Viper
2. (__________) RAM 1500
3. (__________) SRT Charger
4. (__________) SRT Challenger
5. (__________) RAM ProMaster
6. (__________) Dakota
7. (__________) Ball
8. (__________) a bullet
9. Roger (________)-er
10. "That's my (___________)"
11. (___________)/(___________) Trucks
12. The 2012 Nascar Manufacturers Championship
Winner is: (____________)
My guesses. For #1 to #6 I used the new marketing brands, not the VIN brandsCarStar said:Let's play a little game of "Fill in the Blank." See if you can correctly fill
in each correct missing automotive brand name or the appropriate word:
1. (SRT) Viper
2. (n/a) RAM 1500
3. (n/a) SRT Charger
4. (n/a) SRT Challenger
5. (n/a) RAM ProMaster
6. (RAM) Dakota
7. (Dodge) Ball
8. (Dodge) a bullet
9. Roger (Dodge)-er
10. "That's my (_?_)"
11. (Dodge)/(Dodge) Trucks or (Dodge)/(RAM) Trucks
12. The 2012 Nascar Manufacturers Championship Winner is: (Dodge)
Neither is the WSJautoedizione. With all due respect, it's not exaclty 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.
Do "brands" really matter so much in the overall scheme of the company? Maybe at one time, when there were separate marketing and dealer entities, it mattered. Now so much, aside from tradition and loyalty, it does not matter as much since all brands (even Fiat/Alfa to a degree) are under one roof so-to-speak.
Think of the Scion brand within the Toyota dealers. It's a sub-brand the compliments the Toyota brand without allof the extra overhead associated with another brand name. Except with Chrysler/Fiat, they are all "sub-brands".
With that being stated, and I know it sounds ridiculous to say as much, but I think Chrysler/Fiat has room for even more brands if they think it's necessary.
The fact is that that each brand within the family is capable of having carrying even just one or two cars. And when it comes to sales, who cares how many each brand sells. What becomes more important, at that point, it which platform/chassis/factory is making the sales numbers.
Think of the Scion brand within the Toyota dealers. It's a sub-brand the compliments the Toyota brand without allof the extra overhead associated with another brand name. Except with Chrysler/Fiat, they are all "sub-brands".
With that being stated, and I know it sounds ridiculous to say as much, but I think Chrysler/Fiat has room for even more brands if they think it's necessary.
The fact is that that each brand within the family is capable of having carrying even just one or two cars. And when it comes to sales, who cares how many each brand sells. What becomes more important, at that point, it which platform/chassis/factory is making the sales numbers.
Historical example (which has some merit, but there were other issues that had impact)VintageRust said:Do "brands" really matter so much in the overall scheme of the company? Maybe at one time, when there were separate marketing and dealer entities, it mattered. Now so much, aside from tradition and loyalty, it does not matter as much since all brands (even Fiat/Alfa to a degree) are under one roof so-to-speak.
Think of the Scion brand within the Toyota dealers. It's a sub-brand the compliments the Toyota brand without allof the extra overhead associated with another brand name. Except with Chrysler/Fiat, they are all "sub-brands".
With that being stated, and I know it sounds ridiculous to say as much, but I think Chrysler/Fiat has room for even more brands if they think it's necessary.
The fact is that that each brand within the family is capable of having carrying even just one or two cars. And when it comes to sales, who cares how many each brand sells. What becomes more important, at that point, it which platform/chassis/factory is making the sales numbers.
1968.. BMH (itself the merger of BMC (Austin-Morris-MG-Riley-Wolseley) & Jaguar/Daimler/CoventryClimax) & Leyland (Standard-Triumph, Rover, Leyland) merge to from BL. The first wave of rationalization and dealer networks are done 68-69, with overlapping / badge engineered models being dropped: Riley is axed, and various BMC models eliminated. By mid 1970's, financial disater came, and nationalization of BL began. The great idea that the vehicles were 'Leyland' products came into being and advertising was done in the UK & Europe as 'Leyland TR7, Leyland Princess, Leyland Mini, etc.)
This wasn't so much of letting a brand stand for certain values, but thinking that the model itself carried the customer loyalty. Would a FiatGroupAutomobiles, i.e.: FGA Viper, or FGA Challenger carry brand loyalty.. kind of doubt it. I think there is room for numerous brands under one roof. Chrysler, Fiat, Dodge, Lancia, etc. They only dilemma goes back to the discussion earlier (maybe even in a different thread?) of brand momentum or traction. Ford & Chevy have significant 'mass' due to everything labeled as such.
Yes, brands do merge and turn into new companies, but it is usually the smaller companies being absorbed into the mix out of necessity. Chrysler isn't really in that group in the sense Dodge, Chrysler and Jeep all sell well enough they don't need propped from being outsized (per se) by other companies. AMC came from several other companies, like Nash, Hudson, and Studebaker, all three companies were losing sales and could not survive alone, thus they did become AMC (after Rambler) out of necessity. At the same time, Chevy, GMC, Pontiac, Buick, Oldsmobile, Cadillac, etc., remained their own and as long as they were individual companies, doing OK, and really didn't start having problems until less individual identity started disappearing, and same with Plymouth, so there was the necessity to go by the wayside.
With this in mind, melding Fiat with Chrysler, they still remain two different animals. They run different, feel different, build-size is different, and turning them into Chryats or Fislers is a centaur and not natural in the sense. I wouldn't want a tractor to plow a flowerbed any more than I would want a wheelbarrow to harvest 100 acres. At the same time, Chrysler/Dodge/Jeep all fit the needs of the people buying them, the same as Fiat/Lancia etc., will fit the need of others, and trying to fit the needs of the 11-12 percent of sales with these two together is not going to keep them satisfied.
With this in mind, melding Fiat with Chrysler, they still remain two different animals. They run different, feel different, build-size is different, and turning them into Chryats or Fislers is a centaur and not natural in the sense. I wouldn't want a tractor to plow a flowerbed any more than I would want a wheelbarrow to harvest 100 acres. At the same time, Chrysler/Dodge/Jeep all fit the needs of the people buying them, the same as Fiat/Lancia etc., will fit the need of others, and trying to fit the needs of the 11-12 percent of sales with these two together is not going to keep them satisfied.
Hahahaha, so the original source is from l'Espresso (Repubblica)?!! Ok, now it's official: this is 100000% bullcrap.Lampredi said:Apparently, the source is the following article: "Marchionne: addio marchio Fiat?". (AutoEdizione, unfortunately, has a bad habit of not providing the sources of the information they post.)
But yes, it does sound far-fetched, although I believe Marchionne is more than capable of making asinine brand or product decisions...
Whether it is or not, how many of these rumors in the past five to eight years have been or have come true? From the sounds of it, true or not, there is a majority of people that really don't care what happens to Chrysler as a whole, I am kind of in lifeboat with a lot of room in it. When I think about it, that's kind of sad for Chrysler, and me.
Dana44, this Allpar lifeboat is full of people that care
Geez, yet more rumors. speculation and uncertainty.
I realize that there is only so much Mr Marchionne can do to dispel rumors, but he himself generates a fair share of the speculation circulating.
And sorry, automobiles cannot be compared to Coke:
I realize that there is only so much Mr Marchionne can do to dispel rumors, but he himself generates a fair share of the speculation circulating.
And sorry, automobiles cannot be compared to Coke:
- We do not pay $30,000 for a can of Coke (not yet, anyway)
- We will not be stuck with that can of Coke for the next 7 years
- We do not need to rely on that can of Coke to start every morning so we can make a living
- We do not entrust a can of Coke with our safety and that of our entire family
- Our friends and neighbors do not judge us successful --or unsuccessful-- just because they see a can of Coke or Pepsi in our hand
I am not sure I agree with #3... that sweet sweet morning coke....Aldo said:Geez, yet more rumors. speculation and uncertainty.
I realize that there is only so much Mr Marchionne can do to dispel rumors, but he himself generates a fair share of the speculation circulation.
And sorry, automobiles cannot be compared to Coke:
The automotive market hates uncertainty just as much as the stock market does, and many people are going to stay away from brands and names that seem iffy.
- We do not pay $30,000 for a can of Coke (not yet, anyway)
- We will not be stuck with that can of Coke for the next 7 years
- We do not need to rely on that can of Coke to start every morning so we can make a living
- We do not to entrust a can of Coke with our safety nor that of our entire family
- Our friends and neighbors do not judge us successful --or unsuccessful-- just because they see a can of Coke or Pepsi in our hand
21 - 40 of 41 Posts
- This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Allpar Forums
A forum community dedicated to Dodge, Jeep, Ram, Chrysler, AMC owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about performance, modifications, classifieds, troubleshooting, maintenance, and more!
Full Forum Listing
