Allpar Forums banner
41 - 60 of 74 Posts

·
Premium Member
2002 Ram 2500 Quad Cab 4x4 with Cummins.
Joined
·
4,282 Posts
Heck some of the youngsters don't even want to drive. My stepdaughter had us hauling her butt around to work and any other place. Her Mom, like most moms was okay with it. She was "scared" to get behind the wheel. I said she needs to learn to drive and move out, she was like 20 at that time. Both happened. Lol
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,833 Posts
100%? Geesh.
Chrysler lost. Not enough people cared about the brand to buy what they offered because it wasn’t as desirable as the competition.
It seems that you know very little about the automotive market or business in general.

Chrysler had no updated product. Management, in its wisdom, threw away a billion dollar nameplate in Town & Country in favor of a flawed, inferior and poor selling minivan. The company that invented the minivan is offering the weakest product in the market.

The 300 is on a 15 year old platform with minor updates. It was turned into a fleet queen by the wisdom of management. The 300 has declining quality as management tries to squeeze margins from purchased components.

The 200 was a failure because a CEO threw his designers under the bus for a design that he himself approved. What a small man!

Chrysler was deprived of product and what it received was inferior to the market. Existing product was allowed to age and cheapened so it lost its luxury appeal and became a quality abomination.

Product cannot get stale in autos. Product cannot be flawed or inferior for very long in autos. Chrysler was given both.

The market rejection was caused by incompetent leadership, not by the market, which wanted great new Chrysler products on the heels of 300 and Town & Country.
 

·
Read Only
Joined
·
0 Posts
You can sugar coat it all you want. This was intentional. Management took their toys and went home after the 200 mess. I don't include the Pacifica because it was already in the pipeline. Management has even messed the sacred minivan up as well. Incompetence plain and simple.
I do like sugar coatings


I do like sugar coatings.
Management blames the workers. Workers blame management. Suppliers botch stuff. Designers wont make a proper rear door opening. On and on. The end result of whatever is the cars are not good enough. There's not many who care about the survival of the brand as some think. The evidence is in the sales figures.
 

·
Read Only
Joined
·
0 Posts
It seems that you know very little about the automotive market or business in general.

Chrysler had no updated product. Management, in its wisdom, threw away a billion dollar nameplate in Town & Country in favor of a flawed, inferior and poor selling minivan. The company that invented the minivan is offering the weakest product in the market.

The 300 is on a 15 year old platform with minor updates. It was turned into a fleet queen by the wisdom of management. The 300 has declining quality as management tries to squeeze margins from purchased components.

The 200 was a failure because a CEO threw his designers under the bus for a design that he himself approved. What a small man!

Chrysler was deprived of product and what it received was inferior to the market. Existing product was allowed to age and cheapened so it lost its luxury appeal and became a quality abomination.

Product cannot get stale in autos. Product cannot be flawed or inferior for very long in autos. Chrysler was given both.

The market rejection was caused by incompetent leadership, not by the market, which wanted great new Chrysler products on the heels of 300 and Town & Country.
Did you apply for the CEO position? You seem to have it figured out.
 

·
Premium Member
2002 Ram 2500 Quad Cab 4x4 with Cummins.
Joined
·
4,282 Posts
I do like sugar coatings


I do like sugar coatings.
Management blames the workers. Workers blame management. Suppliers botch stuff. Designers wont make a proper rear door opening. On and on. The end result of whatever is the cars are not good enough. There's not many who care about the survival of the brand as some think. The evidence is in the sales figures.
Management makes the decisions. Workers complain if the decisions are inferior. It starts at the top.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
38,571 Posts
Here's the thing.
Chrysler's (the brand) reputation was poor several times in history. In many cases, it was a single product that transformed the brand (though lack of follow up meant the brand faded again).
Here are a few examples:
1975 Cordoba
1982 LeBaron convertible
2000 PT Cruiser
2005 300
(I omitted minivans because they were primarily Dodge/Plymouth vehicles at th launch and the 1996 redo - which were the hottest points.)
Chrysler needs another breakout product. It's happened before and can happen again.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,833 Posts
Did you apply for the CEO position? You seem to have it figured out.
You are new to Allpar. This is not your ordinary aficionado site.

All the brands are loved here. We are all in favor of seeing every brand thrive.

We do not engage in blind adoration nor tolerate trolling.

If you cannot refute what I post, do not come back with snark. It is a poor substitute for actual intelligence.

Brands do not fail unless they are mismanaged. Chrysler was booming with the 300 and Town & Country. The bankruptcy interrupted that, but sales immediately rebounded, the same as it did for Dodge and Jeep. But while Dodge and Jeep received product and updates, Chrysler was abandoned and taken into blandness. Compare the 2011 300 design (approved by management) with the original 2004.

You cannot refute the sales rebound that makes your position that the market rejected Chrysler 100% WRONG.

The current state of Chrysler is thanks to incompetent mismanagement that was not smart enough to bring Fiat or Alfa back to North America. It certainly did not know what to do with Dodge. It used Jeeps strong BRAND VALUE as a catch-all for inferior CUVs that are getting beat off-road.

Markets do not just wake up one day and abandon something they loved. Something needed to change and it was Chrysler that was changed for the worse.

Learn the lesson. All the two wheel drive Jeeps could have been Chryslers.
 

·
Registered
2014 Jeep Compass
Joined
·
696 Posts
in favor of a flawed, inferior and poor selling minivan.
Now, I'm not trying to find reasons to argue with you (I'll give you poorer selling for sure), but flawed and inferior?
Isn't the Pacifica one of the best triumphs of FCA's many faults?
I rarely see one come in for issues, and if one does, it's a hybrid.
I work with a truck bro that'd damn near buy one because he even likes it.
It's leagues ahead of the RT's..... particularly since it comes without the 3 oil panned, "I'll always leak", 62TE.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,833 Posts
Now, I'm not trying to find reasons to argue with you (I'll give you poorer selling for sure), but flawed and inferior?
Isn't the Pacifica one of the best triumphs of FCA's many faults?
I rarely see one come in for issues, and if one does, it's a hybrid.
I work with a truck bro that'd damn near buy one because he even likes it.
It's leagues ahead of the RT's..... particularly since it comes without the 3 oil panned, "I'll always leak", 62TE.
Go look at any comparison to the competition. The Pacifica loses almost always.

Toyota, Honda and Kia have kept updating and refreshing their minivans while the Pacifica has only minor updates. FCA's slow refresh has allowed the competition to pass them.

Granted, the Pacifica interior is beautiful. But it is using a decade-old motor. The hybrid has been flawed since introduction. They were late to the game with AWD. The Voyager is not selling well (granted, there are production issues now that are out of the company's control).

But they went from undisputed minivan leader to lagger.
 

·
Premium Member
2002 Ram 2500 Quad Cab 4x4 with Cummins.
Joined
·
4,282 Posts
One thing that I IMHO that needs to change fundamentally at the NA operations is waiting till mid cycle to basically do nothing to their products. There are some minor tweaks, but thats pretty much it. Granted, not all companies do major changes, but it seems to be the direction they're moving. While this minivan is better looking then the RT was, it's still not as sharp as the 96 versions were. I'm sure that style won't fly today, but there are some things style wise, interiors not included, that are just off.
 

·
Read Only
Joined
·
0 Posts
You are new to Allpar. This is not your ordinary aficionado site.

All the brands are loved here. We are all in favor of seeing every brand thrive.

We do not engage in blind adoration nor tolerate trolling.

If you cannot refute what I post, do not come back with snark. It is a poor substitute for actual intelligence.

Brands do not fail unless they are mismanaged. Chrysler was booming with the 300 and Town & Country. The bankruptcy interrupted that, but sales immediately rebounded, the same as it did for Dodge and Jeep. But while Dodge and Jeep received product and updates, Chrysler was abandoned and taken into blandness. Compare the 2011 300 design (approved by management) with the original 2004.

You cannot refute the sales rebound that makes your position that the market rejected Chrysler 100% WRONG.

The current state of Chrysler is thanks to incompetent mismanagement that was not smart enough to bring Fiat or Alfa back to North America. It certainly did not know what to do with Dodge. It used Jeeps strong BRAND VALUE as a catch-all for inferior CUVs that are getting beat off-road.

Markets do not just wake up one day and abandon something they loved. Something needed to change and it was Chrysler that was changed for the worse.

Learn the lesson. All the two wheel drive Jeeps could have been Chryslers.
"You are 100% wrong.

"It seems that you know very little about the automotive market or business in general."

"You cannot refute the sales rebound that makes your position that the market rejected Chrysler 100% WRONG."

I think the snark was appropriate.
I am new here. I haven't trolled and have been respectful in my posts. And until Erik Latranyi replaces AllPar at the top of the page I'll ignore your do's and don'ts and your ideas of what this site is and isn't. Because someone disagrees with your opinion doesn't make them 100% wrong. You may disagree, doesn't make you right, doesn't excuse arrogance. I'm done with you and won't read another word you type.

ImperialCrown, Mods, if I'm out of line send me a message and I'll leave, save you the bother.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
32,584 Posts
Erik has a history of warnings - 5 this year alone.
I would suggest filtering out his remarks and report as necessary, rather than leaving.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,283 Posts
Yes. Except that the financial case for andor against new Chrysler models is full of pretty thorny and weedy devilish details. I.e., Risk.

.... given the enfeeblement of the Chrysler brand over many a year, preDaimler, preFca, fca and currently. Wherever the merely moralistic Blame(s) may lie. Speaking financially ONLY, that is.
Speaking Financially only, the entire automobile industry is non-viable, as is well known in high finance. High cost, low margin, spotty quality, subject to whims and fashion etc. Why hasn't any of the worlds many Billionaires invested heavily in auto's? Not counting Elon Musk! No return on investment, yet people continue to want cars, so we continue to make them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,833 Posts
"You are 100% wrong.

"It seems that you know very little about the automotive market or business in general."

"You cannot refute the sales rebound that makes your position that the market rejected Chrysler 100% WRONG."

I think the snark was appropriate.
I am new here. I haven't trolled and have been respectful in my posts. And until Erik Latranyi replaces AllPar at the top of the page I'll ignore your do's and don'ts and your ideas of what this site is and isn't. Because someone disagrees with your opinion doesn't make them 100% wrong. You may disagree, doesn't make you right, doesn't excuse arrogance. I'm done with you and won't read another word you type.

ImperialCrown, Mods, if I'm out of line send me a message and I'll leave, save you the bother.
You still have provided nothing to back up your claim.....as I asked from you.

Opinions are plentiful here. But they are not FACT.

FACTS are backed up with evidence, as I did in trying to explain why you are wrong.

Feel free to ignore my posts if you cannot refute them.

Posting: "The market rejected Chrysler" without backing it up is not a discussion. We have discussions here and use data to back it up. Our opinions are separated from the data or backed up by it.
 

·
Premium Member
2002 Ram 2500 Quad Cab 4x4 with Cummins.
Joined
·
4,282 Posts
"You are 100% wrong.

"It seems that you know very little about the automotive market or business in general."

"You cannot refute the sales rebound that makes your position that the market rejected Chrysler 100% WRONG."

I think the snark was appropriate.
I am new here. I haven't trolled and have been respectful in my posts. And until Erik Latranyi replaces AllPar at the top of the page I'll ignore your do's and don'ts and your ideas of what this site is and isn't. Because someone disagrees with your opinion doesn't make them 100% wrong. You may disagree, doesn't make you right, doesn't excuse arrogance. I'm done with you and won't read another word you type.

ImperialCrown, Mods, if I'm out of line send me a message and I'll leave, save you the bother.
So, I'll bite. What kind of experience do you bring to the table that says the Chrysler brand should die?
 

·
Jeepaholic
Joined
·
6,163 Posts
When a brand has only an ancient car, and a minivan (hardly a segment to hang your hat on), I'd say its difficult to truly evaluate whether the brand has viability or not for the future. Give it some new product, in the major segments...CUV's...and see where it goes from there. Now that they actually have a new skipper, maybe things will start happening for them. I hope so.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,581 Posts
When a brand has only an ancient car, and a minivan (hardly a segment to hang your hat on), I'd say its difficult to truly evaluate whether the brand has viability or not for the future. Give it some new product, in the major segments...CUV's...and see where it goes from there. Now that they actually have a new skipper, maybe things will start happening for them. I hope so.
I remain hopeful and optimistic that FCA's marriage to PSA is the best thing that could have happened to Chrysler and Lancia brands.

Not only is Mr. Tavares a true 'car guy'...even to the point of racing them, he is also a more than astute executive in his field....(I credit a lot of this to Carlos Ghosn's mentoring).

He has already made it clear that he values the concept of having strong regional brands, and I have no reason to believe he will do a sudden 'about-face' on this.

He has already performed a minor miracle in the rescue of PSA during the last decade...hence...my whimsical nick-name "Saint Tavares of Portugal".;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,833 Posts
I remain hopeful and optimistic that FCA's marriage to PSA is the best thing that could have happened to Chrysler and Lancia brands.

Not only is Mr. Tavares a true 'car guy'...even to the point of racing them, he is also a more than astute executive in his field....(I credit a lot of this to Carlos Ghosn's mentoring).

He has already made it clear that he values the concept of having strong regional brands, and I have no reason to believe he will do a sudden 'about-face' on this.

He has already performed a minor miracle in the rescue of PSA during the last decade...hence...my whimsical nick-name "Saint Tavares of Portugal".;)
Don't forget that he turned Opel/Vauxhall into a "cool" and profitable brand after GM's decades of failure to do so, proving he can manage branding and finances.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,581 Posts
Don't forget that he turned Opel/Vauxhall into a "cool" and profitable brand after GM's decades of failure to do so, proving he can manage branding and finances.
You're right. I forgot about that...
Revise the count to 1.5 minor miracles.:p:D

On a more serious note....I really DO think that the "cool-ness" factor of OPEL-Vauxhall has been raised to the point where I think it might be worth the gamble to bring one of them...probably OPEL to North America.

After all...Stella DOES need a sort of 'clearing-house' brand for anything that can't readily be pigeon-holed as a Jeep, Dodge, or Ram.
If they're not going to do it with Chrysler...then...it &^%$(@# better be OPEL!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,833 Posts
You're right. I forgot about that...
Revise the count to 1.5 minor miracles.:p:D

On a more serious note....I really DO think that the "cool-ness" factor of OPEL-Vauxhall has been raised to the point where I think it might be worth the gamble to bring one of them...probably OPEL to North America.

After all...Stella DOES need a sort of 'clearing-house' brand for anything that can't readily be pigeon-holed as a Jeep, Dodge, or Ram.
If they're not going to do it with Chrysler...then...it &^%$(@# better be OPEL!
Opel had spotty success as Buick. There is no reason it cannot be done with Chrysler now, given proper leadership.

Buick did not have great branding either. No focus on what it was.

Chrysler could go for the same "cool" factor that Opel is capturing....the same "cool" factor that Fiat was trying to create, but failed miserably.
 
41 - 60 of 74 Posts
Top