Allpar Forums banner

21 - 40 of 55 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
881 Posts
This merger is as much about long term survival as it is leveraging a larger size to contain future costs. I don't believe Tavares who will be CEO and has spent much time here in the states will fiddle too much with things here. NA makes all the money, and with some fresh things for Dodge and Chrysler could make even more. This new company's biggest hurdles are in Europe and China, not here.
Folks need to wrap their minds around what you said. There's no reason for Chrysler and Dodge to do anything other than expand lineup, within reason.
"PSA's group net profit increased 13.2% to a record 3.2 billion euros, and the company increased its dividend against 2019 results to 1.23 euros per share, up 58% from 2018 levels."
autoblog com/2020/02/26/psa-peugeot-citroen-record-profit/

FCA "reported full-year net profit from continuing operations of €2.7 billion, or $2.96 billion"
thedetroitbureau com/2020/02/fiat-chrysler-posts-record-full-year-results

PSA makes money in Europe, it made more money than FCA last year. It is supplying the platforms and capacity that will save Stellantis. You can discount money losing Fiat operations all you want, but the merger doesn't work without PSA.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
46 Posts
"PSA's group net profit increased 13.2% to a record 3.2 billion euros, and the company increased its dividend against 2019 results to 1.23 euros per share, up 58% from 2018 levels."
autoblog com/2020/02/26/psa-peugeot-citroen-record-profit/

FCA "reported full-year net profit from continuing operations of €2.7 billion, or $2.96 billion"
thedetroitbureau com/2020/02/fiat-chrysler-posts-record-full-year-results

PSA makes money in Europe, it made more money than FCA last year. It is supplying the platforms and capacity that will save Stellantis. You can discount money losing Fiat operations all you want, but the merger doesn't work without PSA.
Net profit is not as good as the EBIT to show how a compagny makes money.

And BOTH FCA and PSA are strong money makers! Stellantis will be a champion in that.

But FCA makes and has made much more EBIT than PSA in almost the last 5/6 years... but PSA has become a leader in EBIT margin to.

I don’t know why FCA’s haters don’t see that PSA AND FCA are healthy partners and Stellantis could be even better!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,002 Posts
I'm not going to judge a merger based on what's in legal papers.
I'm going to judge it by what's in the showroom.
DCX - Lots of product, cheap interiors, designs that lasted longer than the DCX corporation.
FCA - Contracting lineups, nicer interiors, lots of unfulfilled promises.
Stellantis - The future will tell.
You forgot to add bankruptcy to Daimler.

Record breaking profits for FCA.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,002 Posts
You forgot to quote the next paragraph from AN:

"This action is being taken because from the start the holding company was meant to be headquartered in the Netherlands."

Again from earlier in the article

  • "The Stellantis board will have 11 directors, six of whom are to be nominated by PSA, PSA shareholders or PSA employees, or are current PSA executives.
  • The combined group's first CEO, who is vested with the full authority to individually represent Stellantis, is Carlos Tavares, the current president of the PSA managing board (and CEO of PSA Group).
  • PSA shareholders will pay a pre-merger premium.
According to the first two points above, the PSA side will have the upper hand after the merger. This is true even though Exor, the Agnelli family company that is now the largest shareholder of FCA, will hold the largest stake in Stellantis with 14.4 percent. The Peugeot family will have the second largest stake with 7.2 percent, followed by the French state with 6.2 percent and the Chinese group Dongfeng with 5.6 percent; all of the latter three are current shareholders of PSA."

The board is locked in for 4 years and Tavares will be there at least 5 years.
Tavaresh is neutral member.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
46 Posts
Tavares is PSA membre until the merger, in order to do the reverse merger much more simple, and then, will become a Stellantis (neutral) member.

The merger of equals is pretty well done.

I don’t know why people doesn’t see the slightly balance in favor of FCA/Exor. With 50.47% of Stellantis owned by exFCA sh, FCA being the only surviving entity, and Exor being the first of the major sh and having the only Executive position as Chairman with Elkann, between all the shareholders.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
881 Posts
Net profit is not as good as the EBIT to show how a company makes money.

And BOTH FCA and PSA are strong money makers! Stellantis will be a champion in that.

But FCA makes and has made much more EBIT than PSA in almost the last 5/6 years... but PSA has become a leader in EBIT margin to.

I don’t know why FCA’s haters don’t see that PSA AND FCA are healthy partners and Stellantis could be even better!
Peugeot and Chrysler (Jeep and Ram) are money makers. Fiat (FALM) is a money loser. Give Fiat (and Dodge and Chrysler) the Opel treatment and turn them into money makers. There is great potential in the merger, mostly in improving and increasing the number of FCA FWD platform vehicles. GSE and especially GME could improve PSA models.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
881 Posts
Tavares is PSA membre until the merger, in order to do the reverse merger much more simple, and then, will become a Stellantis (neutral) member.

The merger of equals is pretty well done.

I don’t know why people doesn’t see the slightly balance in favor of FCA/Exor. With 50.47% of Stellantis owned by exFCA sh, FCA being the only surviving entity, and Exor being the first of the major sh and having the only Executive position as Chairman with Elkann, between all the shareholders.
I hope he actually is neutral. That would be a welcome change from Sergio who clearly favored Fiat over Chrysler. If Tavares is neutral then it becomes a merger of equals. FCA survives for one day because they want to be incorporated in the Netherlands, it is irrelevant to the balance, as is 0.47% of the shares. 14.4% is not a controlling interest, no double voting rights for 3 years. If Tavares is neutral he will offset any Fiat bias from Elkann.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
46 Posts
Stellantis will have only 2 Executives in control, Elkann and Tavares.
Exor will be the main major shareholder and the only major shareholder with a controlling position.

And Peugeot and/or French State together will not be allowed to have more shares than the 14.4% of Exor, and the only one with Executive (controlling) position is Exor.

Tavares will balanced Elkann, as Elkann will balanced Tavares. ;)

And I don’t see how Marchionne favored FIAT instead of Chrysler... Chrysler was in default... Marchionne made it a lot of money maker...
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
37,508 Posts
You forgot to add bankruptcy to Daimler.

Record breaking profits for FCA.
Technical the bankruptcy was Cerberus.

And FCA’s record profits are derived from many designs rooted in the DCX era.
 
  • Like
Reactions: David S

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,602 Posts
Before we all get carried along by the beguiling myth that Chrysler really didn't need any help, it's worth considering the bits of the product delivery you don't see: the factories. Yes, many of the designs date from pre-FCA, but a product design is only half the job of making a car. The very first thing FIAT did with Chrysler was pour money into the former Chrysler facilities. From simple stuff like clean floors, proper lighting and increased maintenance spending to reinstating a proper end-to-end quality program (Chrysler had had such a system pre-merger, but Daimler neutered it and Cerberus never bothered).

All of this investment has allowed FCA US to build its existing products profitably, by improving the efficiency of the factories and reducing wasted spending (whether that be rejected components, line downtime, injury events, supply holdups, it's all the same. The WCM system used at FCA counts all of these as "waste" that has to be reduced).

PSA, meanwhile, followed a path that was basically Sergio's original plan for FIAT: aggressive platform and power train reduction, huge increase in commonality but differentiate on styling and branding, and also become a supplier of power trains, not just a captive customer (FIAT, like Peugeot sold engines to other manufacturers). It worked for PSA, it would have worked for FIAT too, but the financial costs of standing the US operations back on its feet prevented the heavier investment that would have been needed in Europe to achieve the same success.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
881 Posts
Before we all get carried along by the beguiling myth that Chrysler really didn't need any help, it's worth considering the bits of the product delivery you don't see: the factories. Yes, many of the designs date from pre-FCA, but a product design is only half the job of making a car. The very first thing FIAT did with Chrysler was pour money into the former Chrysler facilities. From simple stuff like clean floors, proper lighting and increased maintenance spending to reinstating a proper end-to-end quality program (Chrysler had had such a system pre-merger, but Daimler neutered it and Cerberus never bothered).

All of this investment has allowed FCA US to build its existing products profitably, by improving the efficiency of the factories and reducing wasted spending (whether that be rejected components, line downtime, injury events, supply holdups, it's all the same. The WCM system used at FCA counts all of these as "waste" that has to be reduced).

PSA, meanwhile, followed a path that was basically Sergio's original plan for FIAT: aggressive platform and power train reduction, huge increase in commonality but differentiate on styling and branding, and also become a supplier of power trains, not just a captive customer (FIAT, like Peugeot sold engines to other manufacturers). It worked for PSA, it would have worked for FIAT too, but the financial costs of standing the US operations back on its feet prevented the heavier investment that would have been needed in Europe to achieve the same success.
Chrysler needed a boatload of help. Fiat needed help. Both would have gone under without US and Canadian (90%/10%) taxpayer money. Fiat was given grants and loans, the loans were paid back by other loans, which were paid back by profits almost exclusively from the North American brands, because the Italian brands kept having quarters and years where they lost money.

Fiat did not save Chrysler. The North American taxpayers saved Fiat and Chrysler. The investment was possible due to the bailout.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,002 Posts
Fiat Group was profitable in 2010:

It can be seen that Fiat Group which included what's now known as CNHI had 600 million profit in 2010, 838 million loss in 2009 and 1.721 billion profit in 2008. All is in euros.
Profit in 2010 was at 222 million euros without CNHI. 2009 loss was at 345 million euros.

Fiat Group excluding Chrysler was profitable in 2011:

2011 was the first year when results for Fiat and Chrysler were together. But there is a part where it says Fiat excluding Chrysler just above 1 billion euros. In that year Fiat Group made 60.9% of total profits.

2012 and 2013 were the years in which Fiat Group had lost money. They've bounced in 2014. It's very easy to find and check.

Some fat years before they took over Chrysler and one after it were the ones which fed ex Fiat Group. Add to that constant sell of silverware like Ferrari or later Magneti Marelli. Chrysler didn't have such assets.

We can go even more in the past for Exor owned Fiat Group business:

From 2007 full year reports one can see that profits for 2007 were at 2.054 billion eur0, in 2016 1.151 billion euro, and in 2005 1.420 billion euro.

As I've said without these fat years Fiat woulndn't be in position to go after Chrysler. No doubt about it.

And as late Sergio admitted shortly before his death in mid 2018. They didn't give enough attention on the European side of FCA business in early to mid 2010's. It was lack of faith and courage. They mismanaged Europe, left it without new products which has reflected in the latter part of 2010's or even today.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
Here we go again Daimler did a few good things , foe a while left Jeep and Dodge Ram alone for a while, Introduced the large car platform that soldiers on today. Since that time I have owned 3 large cars, still have the challenger and a 2015 300s that makes me sorry I bought it, rattle city. My 2008 Challenger has a more solid feel. We bought mid sized cars before these and enjoyed them till Daimler ruined them and anything smaller. If I get another vehicle it will be a body on frame Jeep GC. Right now prices of new vehicles look unaffordable to US. I would like to see MOPAR passenger cars go through a leadership cycle before I depart the planet. I think the truck segment is doing well from what I see. Just need to be able to satisfy customers that get the occasional lemon like was done for me. Bad Daimler Stratus V6 got a wonderful deal on a Jeep GC the following year. Tip is it pays to stick with one dealer, my old one is gone!!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
52 Posts
There seems to be some irrational fear of Fiat in the US. They are a car manufacturer just like dozens of others. That they saw fit to take on the lame duck of Chrysler is something of a constant puzzle to most Europeans as the European side of the group ended up starved of investment in order to boost the very troubled US side. Fiat did not need Chrysler as much as Chrysler needed Fiat - there could have been a merger with PSA way back then for all it matters.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,546 Posts
There seems to be some irrational fear of Fiat in the US. They are a car manufacturer just like dozens of others. That they saw fit to take on the lame duck of Chrysler is something of a constant puzzle to most Europeans as the European side of the group ended up starved of investment in order to boost the very troubled US side. Fiat did not need Chrysler as much as Chrysler needed Fiat - there could have been a merger with PSA way back then for all it matters.
Doesn't help then the namegame "Fix It Again Tony" sticked to Fiat more than "Found On Road Dead" for Ford.
 

·
Virginia Gentleman
Joined
·
14,895 Posts
Growing up, Ford meant one of two things - "Found on Road Dead" or "Fix or Repair Daily". The few Ford fanatics I know say it stands for "First on Race Day."

GMC - Gotta Mechanic Coming
 
21 - 40 of 55 Posts
Top