jg95z28

Robert_Nashville

Given the subject matter of this thread I though this news clip (form a service I receive daily) might be of interest…the article it refers to (link to the full article below) specifically speaks to quality strides of the domestics as well as American car buyer’s perceptions of Detroit’s vs. import brands.

Full article here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...122001763.html

91_z28_4me

I just read that on GMI and here was the what I posted after reading it.

Robert_Nashville

Isn’t it curious that the nameplate the salesman (who was quoted) is selling is Chrysler/Jeep!

Given the much used “where the profit goes” mantra so many are fond of and given that ALL of Chrysler’s profits go to Germany, I fail to see how anyone can continue to call Chrysler/Dodge/Jeep “American” and keep a straight face while doing so.

In other words, the “where the profits go” aficionados need to tell Anvari (the salesman) that if he really thinks Americans should be buying “American” cars then he needs to start selling for another dealership.

91_z28_4me

I believe I read that Chrysler, not DCX, spent about $4 Billion last year in the US. And I am also assuming that Chrysler plants in the US employ, and support via retirement pensions, more people than Toyota does (but that is just an assumption.)

flowmotion

Everyone in the automotive industry is multi-national, so of course.

That's the underlying point here, I think. The Big Three have traditionally treated their home market as a competitive backwater where they could afford to build un-exportable vehicles. And that's left them in a tenuous position where everyone else can "cherry pick" the North American market through a combination of imports and local assembly. While the Big Three is stuck with a more limited portfolio of domesticated cars that often rely on fleet volume.

Now, obviously there's certain cars that will probably only really sell well in the NA market (Camaro). But I'm at a loss for the reason that the Malibu or Fusion needs to be fundamentally different than the product sold throughout the rest of the world (especially when their primary competitors are not).

Sorry to interrupt the flag waving, but I think the main issue here is that manufacturing has become globally integrated, and I'm just not seeing that happening with the Big Three's NA operations. Which, IMO, is a very bad sign.

flowmotion

You're right -- I don't have exact figures. But I did read an article about a Benz plant where they shut down the line once an hour so that everyone could have a smoke break

But the point is that it is possible to export a relatively expensive first world unionized product.

Robert_Nashville

Let’s be accurate, Chrysler has no money apart from DCX…to say “Chrysler” spent money and ignore who that money really belongs to would be akin to saying “Chevrolet” built a new plant and claim it wasn’t with GM’s money. However, I don’t doubt your basic statements above about the capital investment and the retirees - I haven’t seen any figures that would specifically support the “retiree” number (although it’s a logical assumption).

In any case, where I take exception is with the inconsistency of those who claim that a particular vehicle is or isn’t “American” based on “where the profits go” yet blindly call Chrysler/Dodge/Jeep “American” despite the fact that ALL their profits GO to a German company.

Those same people tend to want to completely ignore the tens of billions of dollars spent/being spent by foreign nameplates who have built/are building facilities in the U.S. and employ thousands of Americans (and many more in support industries) all based on “where the profits go”.

I’ve always maintained that the “where the profits go” argument is a specious one. That said, for those who hold to the “where the profits go” mantra, it would at least be refreshing if they would be consistent and acknowledge what Chrysler is today rather than cling to what it was in the past.

SSbaby

That's not an accurate statement. If DCX were to sell of Chrysler, would Chrysler cease to exist? The world is full of non-profitable automakers... and just a few years ago it was Chrysler who were funding Daimler-Benz. So fortunes do in fact change for companies.

Anyway, if the profits went to GM instead of into pension funds, I dare say the GM of today would be far stronger than at present. Ditto Ford.

Robert_Nashville

What would happen to Chrysler if Chrysler was sold off? Who knows! What would happen would all depend on who bought them and why and what they intended to do with Chrysler...what ever might happen to Chrysler "if" doesn't change what Chrysler is today.

My statement is 100% accurate...it has nothing to do with what sub-comapny of the parent company is or isn't making a profit...it has everything to do with ownership...whoever owns the company owns the money.

There is no Chrysler apart from DCX any more than there is a Pontiac apart from GM and to look at Chrysler as if it's a separate, distinct company today is to simply ignore reality.

Not sure where you are going with the pension fund issue...of course, if GM and Ford didn't have their pension obligations they would have more money to spend elsewhere.

91_z28_4me

Lets be real here guys, Robert's comments ring true. Chrysler is just a part of DCX and the Germans are in charge. All of Chryslers money on the table when the 'merger of equals' took place funded Benz. All the profit from current Chrysler sales goes to Germany as well.

flowmotion

Wikipedia has some stats on DCX ownership:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daimler...imler_Chrysler

SSbaby

The profits might go to Germany but the Germans haven't forgotten to re-invest money into Chrysler. Chrysler still have "made in America" DNA in their design, and nobody has forgotten where Chryslers are manufactured. Chrysler is not a Toyota building Camrys for Americans. Chrysler designs reflect American culture... even if they are manufactured in Canada, Austria etc... Chrysler is still more American than Toyota. How has Chrysler's vehicle range altered to reflect its German ownership? It hasn't. Nothing has really changed in the way Chryslers are designed and built since the merger, has it?

Robert_Nashville

Do you think Toyota and Honda and Kia and Nissan and BMW and MB and many other "foreign" companies aren't investing tens of billion$ here? Why does it count for Chrysler but not for the rest?

If you want to turn this into an emotional argument about what Chrysler has been and its "DNA" and how it is still more “American” than Toyota then there is obviously no fact than will sway your opinion. However, you are missing the pont of my prior posts.

My point was directed to those who constantly beat the drum of “where the profits go” and say that a BMW or a Toyota or a Honda MADE in the United States is not “American” because the profits go to Germany or Japan. As I said above, I think that's a stupid argument but if the argument is going to be made then I think it reasonable to at least be consistent...if the be-all and end-all of what is or isn’t “American” is where the profits go then it’s ridiculous to call Chrysler “American” and BMW “foreign” because ALL of Chrysler’s profits go to Germany; just as they do for BMW.

SSbaby

Robert, where do profits go for DCX? Please consider the expenditure and R&D involved in designing a totally new Chrysler, also manufacturing the vehicles in UAW staffed plants and selling it in NOT only in the US but also overseas markets.

Obviously some profit is reinvested in the US economy while most of it appears to go to Germany. I can respect your point here... but let's not turn your argument into Japanese cars are every bit as American as the Big 2.5 because that argument is stretching things too far. Chryslers are still as American as they were prior to the merger... when Chrysler was independent and flowing red ink!

Why not compare GM/Ford against the Japanese-American companies as DCX appears to have a history which we cannot agree to disagree over?