Allpar Forums banner

Should Jeep no longer make 2 wheel drives?

  • Yes

    Votes: 17 77.3%
  • No

    Votes: 5 22.7%
21 - 30 of 30 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,864 Posts
The idea that I floated a while back related to the FWD-based SUVs was that Dodge/Chrysler get FWD and AWD variants, and Jeep gets only AWD variants. For Jeep I was envisioning the base model gets the regular AWD setup like they use now, and all of the higher trims get the current Trailhawk setup, and then maybe the Trailhawk gets some improvements.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16 Posts
It is clear that you do not understand branding.
Sorry, I laughed. I work in marketing. :)

You advocate for the same dilution and abuse of brands that we have seen in the past and that led to the weakness of Chrysler and Dodge to compete with other mainstream brands.
You advocate for a return to a brand strategy for Jeep that would bring its sales down 65% or more, in the hopes that people in the USA, Canada and Mexico will then magically return to Dodge and Chrysler "just because." And people outside those markets who can't buy a Dodge or Chrysler will... do what? Buy a Fiat or Citroen instead?

That's not a good risk. That's craziness.

we already see Jeep volumes declining as they lose in the same segments that Chrysler/Dodge lost in the sedan market.....compact and midsize CUVs.
Chrysler and Dodge "lost" in the midsize and compact sedan markets because -- with a handful of exceptions like the Neon -- those markets were mostly money-losers for them, with the development and production costs paid for by the sale of profitable full-sized cars and light trucks/Jeeps. FCA, having limited resources, wisely chose to compete in profitable areas where it could win and had sustained brand advantage, rather than trying the Quixotic approach of trying to convince Honda drivers that a Sebring sedan is a good step up from an Accord.

Doing the same thing over and over while expecting a different outcome is not smart management. It is insanity.
Then why are you advocating going back to the old fashioned strategy where Chrysler and Dodge lead as volume brands while Jeep plays a minor supporting role?

Chrysler and Dodge as the volume leaders just in a handful of markets, selling lots of marginally profitable cars, resulted in a near-collapse in the late 70s (averted by a government bailout), another near-bankruptcy in the early 1990s that was barely avoided, and a third collapse in 2009 that led to Chrysler almost shutting down.

The innovation of Jeep as a global volume leader led to Chrysler Group/FCA's longest unbroken profit streak in its history, and being a desirable merger partner to form the world's fourth largest automaker.

Great brand strategy isn't "return to the US centric past." Great brand strategy is embracing what's successful and profitable and leaving old thinking behind.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
37,490 Posts
“Marketing” is one of the reasons Dodge and Chrysler failed at sedans. Constantly shuffling names to have a “new” product instead of concentrating on product quality and value is a big reason these sedans couldn’t compete.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,028 Posts
“Marketing” is one of the reasons Dodge and Chrysler failed at sedans. Constantly shuffling names to have a “new” product instead of concentrating on product quality and value is a big reason these sedans couldn’t compete.
Fiat has done the same thing to its brands....constantly cancelling model names and replacing them with something else in the belief that they can fool customers. Sales keep spiraling downward for Fiat, Alfa, etc.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,028 Posts
Sorry, I laughed. I work in marketing. :)

Great brand strategy isn't "return to the US centric past." Great brand strategy is embracing what's successful and profitable and leaving old thinking behind.
I would terminate you if you were on my marketing team.

You think chasing trends is marketing. You think you can fool customers.

The FACT is that customers see through your greedy quest for profits and deception.

What you call "old thinking" is actually how people see the Jeep brand. Jeep capability comes from 1941, not from the marketing department. You want to tell them that all the things you believed about Jeep (capability in snow, sand, mud and rocks) is wrong and Jeeps can be something else. No, they cannot.

Subaru understands marketing. They are not chasing some trend. They are strengthening the Subaru name by reinforcing how people have seen the brand for decades, not by trying to fool them or chase profits.

Brands stand for something organic. Jeep, as a brand, stands for something that has been created over 80 years. It does not stand for profits. Jeep is not for everyone.

Strong branding recognizes what is already there from the "old thinking" and reinforces it. It is good to market that Jeep is not for everyone. Jeep is unique. Jeep is about capability first, utility second and adventure third. It is not about fuel economy or street performance. Jeep is not about a great ride. Leave those things to the other brands that you dismiss because you are too lazy to build those brands properly.

Jeep is suffering from a lack of offering what people want....quality, safety and reliability through friendly dealers.

Jeep is declining due to the cheap parts, short cuts in engineering and lack of testing by greedy management.

If that does not change, Jeep will be the same as Chrysler and Dodge.

Hyundai/Kia changed its reputation for lousy quality not through marketing, but by actually delivering on it. Stellantis needs to do the same or the company will be bankrupt again.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
37,490 Posts
Here's where the FWD Jeep argument falls apart.
For years, we were told Jeep was going to be a high margin brand. High margin brands need very specific vehicles that reinforce brand image and meet or exceed customer expectations.
Meanwhile the Jeep lineups are being pumped full of "volume" sellers (remember all the lectures about "margin" and not "volume" as the excuse for starving Chrysler and Dodge?).
But yet, hypocritically they were throwing lower margin high volume models at Jeep.

Profit is roughly margin times volume.
By injecting these FWD "volume" Jeeps into the mix, you are eroding the long term "margin" strategy of Jeep for the sake of short term "volume".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
123 Posts
Discussion Starter #29 (Edited)
I would terminate you if you were on my marketing team.

You think chasing trends is marketing. You think you can fool customers.

The FACT is that customers see through your greedy quest for profits and deception.

What you call "old thinking" is actually how people see the Jeep brand. Jeep capability comes from 1941, not from the marketing department. You want to tell them that all the things you believed about Jeep (capability in snow, sand, mud and rocks) is wrong and Jeeps can be something else. No, they cannot.

Subaru understands marketing. They are not chasing some trend. They are strengthening the Subaru name by reinforcing how people have seen the brand for decades, not by trying to fool them or chase profits.

Brands stand for something organic. Jeep, as a brand, stands for something that has been created over 80 years. It does not stand for profits. Jeep is not for everyone.

Strong branding recognizes what is already there from the "old thinking" and reinforces it. It is good to market that Jeep is not for everyone. Jeep is unique. Jeep is about capability first, utility second and adventure third. It is not about fuel economy or street performance. Jeep is not about a great ride. Leave those things to the other brands that you dismiss because you are too lazy to build those brands properly.

Jeep is suffering from a lack of offering what people want....quality, safety and reliability through friendly dealers.

Jeep is declining due to the cheap parts, short cuts in engineering and lack of testing by greedy management.

If that does not change, Jeep will be the same as Chrysler and Dodge.

Hyundai/Kia changed its reputation for lousy quality not through marketing, but by actually delivering on it. Stellantis needs to do the same or the company will be bankrupt again.
I mostly agree. Chrysler has been in crisis mode since the Daimler disaster but now there is breathing room. Stellantis has an opportunity to rethink Jeep and the rest of the brands. Since crossovers are the new sedans it's time to give Chrysler a strong presence in the more carlike crossovers, Dodge a strong presence in sporty crossovers and take Jeep out of the carlike crossover market and into more capable SUVs. This would make the present branding make sense. PSA already has crossovers to fill out the Chrysler and Dodge lineups. A Cherokee like the Bronco Sport would be a good start for Jeep.
79339
 
21 - 30 of 30 Posts
Top