Now that Fiat is Mopars small car savior..what cars?
06-13-2009, 04:42 PM
#1
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: New England
Posts: 3,749
Now that Fiat is Mopars small car savior..what cars?
I been on the fiat site and just wondering what possible cars would be here in short order rebadged as Chryslers..or I should say Dodge.
06-13-2009, 09:34 PM
#2
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 213
06-14-2009, 10:36 PM
#4
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: USA
Posts: 3,698
Here is what I think...
I think Fiat got Chrysler for nothing...with no liabilities. I think they are gonna rebrand some cars just enough to get Chrysler out of the government's hand's, and it's stock price reasonable. Then they are gonna dump their stock/share like a hot potato and pocket what cash they can. Then while they pocket the money...Chrysler will still have no choice but to source more cars from them in the future because they cannot engineer their own stuff. Then Fiat has a foot hold in the US without having to establish a brand and dealer network.
I think Fiat got Chrysler for nothing...with no liabilities. I think they are gonna rebrand some cars just enough to get Chrysler out of the government's hand's, and it's stock price reasonable. Then they are gonna dump their stock/share like a hot potato and pocket what cash they can. Then while they pocket the money...Chrysler will still have no choice but to source more cars from them in the future because they cannot engineer their own stuff. Then Fiat has a foot hold in the US without having to establish a brand and dealer network.
06-15-2009, 11:12 AM
#5
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: The Golden State
Posts: 13,711
Gotta disagree, and here's why.
Sergio Marchionne is working to become a sort of Carlos Ghosn in creating a multi-national company that has the power of economies of scale and that is a global automotive powerhouse.
Also, his history bears out this notion.
Fiat also owns Alfa Romero, Maseratti, Ferrari, Lancia, Iveco trucks, and La Stampa newspaper. All collected by Marchionne.
When Mercedes bough Chrysler, Chrysler had more cash in it's reserves than GM despite being a fraction of the size, and was making more money per vehicle as a percentage than any mass automotive producer on earth.
When Cerberus too over, they saw that Chrysler had strong truck sales, was a leader in minivan sales, had already gone through a draconian labor purge, and Chrysler was still riding high on the LX cars. To someone who never ran an auto company, it looked like a great investment. Cerberus never ran an auto company, and wasn't prepared for the investments Chrysler needed after Daimler plundered Chrysler's reserves.
There is no reason whatsoever for anyone to want to take Chrysler unless they intended to improve it and incorperate it into their own company. Chrysler has next to no value as a company, yet it has an established North American (even Central and South American) and Australian networks.
Another thing is that Chrysler has a lineup that fully complements a Fiat return to North America. If Chrysler only has to finance development of Rams, Minivans, and LX cars, and Fiat does midsize and small cars, there is a very real potential of making a successful combination. This is what Ford is doing, and what GM was trying to get to (too slowly, as typical) before they imploded.
Whereas Daimler refused to share technology with Chrysler (we got handmedown, no longer used components for the LX cars, and that's all Daimler gave Chrysler), Fiat is making technology sharing the center of the whole Chrysler merge.
And in this case, why not?
It effectively makes their small cars cheaper to produce because the component's development and even in most instances, manufacturing costs are going to be spread out over 2, 3, or even 4 times the volume it was originally priced out for.
You don't simply get into that type of volume, then turn around and walk away from it when the economy recovers....
.... or when for ZERO dollar investment, you suddenly have 1/3 of a company that is now being traded on the stock market at significant value.
Sergio Marchionne is pretty clever.
Sergio Marchionne is working to become a sort of Carlos Ghosn in creating a multi-national company that has the power of economies of scale and that is a global automotive powerhouse.
Also, his history bears out this notion.
Fiat also owns Alfa Romero, Maseratti, Ferrari, Lancia, Iveco trucks, and La Stampa newspaper. All collected by Marchionne.
When Mercedes bough Chrysler, Chrysler had more cash in it's reserves than GM despite being a fraction of the size, and was making more money per vehicle as a percentage than any mass automotive producer on earth.
When Cerberus too over, they saw that Chrysler had strong truck sales, was a leader in minivan sales, had already gone through a draconian labor purge, and Chrysler was still riding high on the LX cars. To someone who never ran an auto company, it looked like a great investment. Cerberus never ran an auto company, and wasn't prepared for the investments Chrysler needed after Daimler plundered Chrysler's reserves.
There is no reason whatsoever for anyone to want to take Chrysler unless they intended to improve it and incorperate it into their own company. Chrysler has next to no value as a company, yet it has an established North American (even Central and South American) and Australian networks.
Another thing is that Chrysler has a lineup that fully complements a Fiat return to North America. If Chrysler only has to finance development of Rams, Minivans, and LX cars, and Fiat does midsize and small cars, there is a very real potential of making a successful combination. This is what Ford is doing, and what GM was trying to get to (too slowly, as typical) before they imploded.
Whereas Daimler refused to share technology with Chrysler (we got handmedown, no longer used components for the LX cars, and that's all Daimler gave Chrysler), Fiat is making technology sharing the center of the whole Chrysler merge.
And in this case, why not?
It effectively makes their small cars cheaper to produce because the component's development and even in most instances, manufacturing costs are going to be spread out over 2, 3, or even 4 times the volume it was originally priced out for.
You don't simply get into that type of volume, then turn around and walk away from it when the economy recovers....
.... or when for ZERO dollar investment, you suddenly have 1/3 of a company that is now being traded on the stock market at significant value.
Sergio Marchionne is pretty clever.
06-15-2009, 11:53 AM
#6
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: MI
Posts: 1,174
I liked the Fiat spyder back in the 70's. But, remember back in 2001/2002 when gm gave Fiat $5_bill for a PUT to buy them. Gm got nothing in return for that cash. Fiat will not put up any money for Chrysler, and, get all that mfg equipment. What a rip-off. Fiat stuff... just like the Yugo. You will see... US will not buy the Fiat tin can POS. Also, look for Fiat to push Camau robotics and automation on Chrysler. I never did like the Camau system. Not flexible @ all, and, I installed thousands of robots. B.
06-15-2009, 10:05 PM
#7
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: USA
Posts: 3,698
You are forgetting a few things however. First off Fiat's plan is only as good as the exectutive who engineered it. In short if for some reason Marchionne leaves or is ousted, the direction of the company could change over night. That leads into point#2, which is that Fiat is an Italian company...and Italians have a history of tiring of leaders and politicians fast..even if they come back in a year or two. I don't think Chrysler will find it's time under Italian ownership as smooth as being owned by the Germans. And I am well aware how unsmooth German ownership was.
Gotta disagree, and here's why.
Sergio Marchionne is working to become a sort of Carlos Ghosn in creating a multi-national company that has the power of economies of scale and that is a global automotive powerhouse.
Also, his history bears out this notion.
Fiat also owns Alfa Romero, Maseratti, Ferrari, Lancia, Iveco trucks, and La Stampa newspaper. All collected by Marchionne.
When Mercedes bough Chrysler, Chrysler had more cash in it's reserves than GM despite being a fraction of the size, and was making more money per vehicle as a percentage than any mass automotive producer on earth.
When Cerberus too over, they saw that Chrysler had strong truck sales, was a leader in minivan sales, had already gone through a draconian labor purge, and Chrysler was still riding high on the LX cars. To someone who never ran an auto company, it looked like a great investment. Cerberus never ran an auto company, and wasn't prepared for the investments Chrysler needed after Daimler plundered Chrysler's reserves.
There is no reason whatsoever for anyone to want to take Chrysler unless they intended to improve it and incorperate it into their own company. Chrysler has next to no value as a company, yet it has an established North American (even Central and South American) and Australian networks.
Another thing is that Chrysler has a lineup that fully complements a Fiat return to North America. If Chrysler only has to finance development of Rams, Minivans, and LX cars, and Fiat does midsize and small cars, there is a very real potential of making a successful combination. This is what Ford is doing, and what GM was trying to get to (too slowly, as typical) before they imploded.
Whereas Daimler refused to share technology with Chrysler (we got handmedown, no longer used components for the LX cars, and that's all Daimler gave Chrysler), Fiat is making technology sharing the center of the whole Chrysler merge.
And in this case, why not?
It effectively makes their small cars cheaper to produce because the component's development and even in most instances, manufacturing costs are going to be spread out over 2, 3, or even 4 times the volume it was originally priced out for.
You don't simply get into that type of volume, then turn around and walk away from it when the economy recovers....
.... or when for ZERO dollar investment, you suddenly have 1/3 of a company that is now being traded on the stock market at significant value.
Sergio Marchionne is pretty clever.
Sergio Marchionne is working to become a sort of Carlos Ghosn in creating a multi-national company that has the power of economies of scale and that is a global automotive powerhouse.
Also, his history bears out this notion.
Fiat also owns Alfa Romero, Maseratti, Ferrari, Lancia, Iveco trucks, and La Stampa newspaper. All collected by Marchionne.
When Mercedes bough Chrysler, Chrysler had more cash in it's reserves than GM despite being a fraction of the size, and was making more money per vehicle as a percentage than any mass automotive producer on earth.
When Cerberus too over, they saw that Chrysler had strong truck sales, was a leader in minivan sales, had already gone through a draconian labor purge, and Chrysler was still riding high on the LX cars. To someone who never ran an auto company, it looked like a great investment. Cerberus never ran an auto company, and wasn't prepared for the investments Chrysler needed after Daimler plundered Chrysler's reserves.
There is no reason whatsoever for anyone to want to take Chrysler unless they intended to improve it and incorperate it into their own company. Chrysler has next to no value as a company, yet it has an established North American (even Central and South American) and Australian networks.
Another thing is that Chrysler has a lineup that fully complements a Fiat return to North America. If Chrysler only has to finance development of Rams, Minivans, and LX cars, and Fiat does midsize and small cars, there is a very real potential of making a successful combination. This is what Ford is doing, and what GM was trying to get to (too slowly, as typical) before they imploded.
Whereas Daimler refused to share technology with Chrysler (we got handmedown, no longer used components for the LX cars, and that's all Daimler gave Chrysler), Fiat is making technology sharing the center of the whole Chrysler merge.
And in this case, why not?
It effectively makes their small cars cheaper to produce because the component's development and even in most instances, manufacturing costs are going to be spread out over 2, 3, or even 4 times the volume it was originally priced out for.
You don't simply get into that type of volume, then turn around and walk away from it when the economy recovers....
.... or when for ZERO dollar investment, you suddenly have 1/3 of a company that is now being traded on the stock market at significant value.
Sergio Marchionne is pretty clever.
06-16-2009, 11:05 AM
#8
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: The Golden State
Posts: 13,711
I liked the Fiat spyder back in the 70's. But, remember back in 2001/2002 when gm gave Fiat $5_bill for a PUT to buy them. Gm got nothing in return for that cash. Fiat will not put up any money for Chrysler, and, get all that mfg equipment. What a rip-off. Fiat stuff... just like the Yugo. You will see... US will not buy the Fiat tin can POS. Also, look for Fiat to push Camau robotics and automation on Chrysler. I never did like the Camau system. Not flexible @ all, and, I installed thousands of robots. B.
General Motors has only gotten their quality act together the last few years. At the turn of the decade, every newly introduced Ford was quickly followed with a recall on the thing. Yet, every new GM vehicle that's come out the past few years has been screwed together tight, and Ford hasn't had a recall on a newly introduced vehicle since the last edition F series truck came out back in 2003. Toyota, Nissan, and even Honda can't say that.
Likewise, Fiat today is far from the POS label you give it.
I think if you were to compare a Bravo to a Cobalt, you probably might change your tune regarding percieved quality. You could also pit a Punto against an Aveo, and I doubt it would be a contest. Both cars are far superior to Chrysler's Sebring and Avenger, and these are Fiat's small "cheap" cars. In short, these cars will be quite competitive here in the US market where a great car here is only mediocore at best overseas.
Fiat was about to go belly up back in 2003, Marchionne got there in 2004.
Marchionne rebuilt Fiat, essentially from the ground up the way Mulally has rebuilt Ford. He's restructured management, refocused on the "car" business (which sounds alot like Mulally). If you think our UAW and CAW are bad, or think our politicians are tough to deal with they don't hold a candle to the difficulty in trouble in dealing with Italian unions and politicians! Like Bill Ford/ Allan Mulally or Rick Wagoner/Bob Lutz arrangement, Fiat's Montezemolo has run blocker and dealt with non automotive issues freeing Marchionne for focus on the car business.
Finally, when GM bought a stake in Fiat, it centered around an option GM could either buy the company (at fair market value, no less) or pay a penalty, much like the agreement GM made with Saab & Isuzu. A similar agreement is how GM wound up with Holden and other global divisions. In this case, GM was attempting to increase their market share in Europe by buying Fiat, expanding Saab, and establishing Cadillac. Instead of incorperating Fiat with GM at a time where GM was grappling withgetting it's act together with dwindling money (this was in 2005), GM took the cheaper option of buying out of Fiat instead of buying it at market value.
FWIW, in addition to the companies I listed in the earlier post, Fiat has also formed a partnetship with Tata Motors of India, and Chery, and together, Fiat is now the 6th largest car company in the world.
And they are still trying to get Opel.
No car company is perfect. Even Mercedes Benz was producing crappy quality ratings early this decade. Each of our big 3 has made serious bonehead moves this past decade. In the early 70s, BMW had a reputation far removed from the sophisticated, quality sports sedan image they have today. But the merge between Chrysler and Fiat is an almost ingenious combination.
Fiat gets a ready-made reentry path into North America & a company that produces the types of vehicles that Americans love: Trucks, Minivans, and large cars. Chrysler gets for free medium and small car platforms and even complete cars itself to fill those segments. Areas Chrysler has become completely unsatisfactory in since they killed the Neon and produced the cheap and questionably attractive Sebring and the downright cheap Avenger.
It seems like a good fit to me.
06-16-2009, 11:19 AM
#9
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: The Golden State
Posts: 13,711
You are forgetting a few things however. First off Fiat's plan is only as good as the exectutive who engineered it. In short if for some reason Marchionne leaves or is ousted, the direction of the company could change over night. That leads into point#2, which is that Fiat is an Italian company...and Italians have a history of tiring of leaders and politicians fast..even if they come back in a year or two. I don't think Chrysler will find it's time under Italian ownership as smooth as being owned by the Germans. And I am well aware how unsmooth German ownership was.
Also, like our own companies and any company on the planet, Fiat has to make it's investors happy. As long as the investors are happy, the management gets to collect another paycheck. Fiat's investors are tickled pink with Marchionne, the way Renault-Nissan investors are tickled pink with Ghosin, and Ford investors are tickled pink with Mulally.
Companies also have a tendacy to do what's needed, regardless as to who's in charge.
Dieter Zetsche ran Chrysler, and he viewed Chrysler as his baby. He's the guy who approved the Dodge Challenger as CEO of DaimlerChrysler, something Jürgen Schrempp resisted. Yet, even though Chrysler had their biggest promoter as CEO, it was Daimler's investors and board that wanted to push Chrysler out... a merger that they as a group were against in the first place.
Fiat investors are actually salvatating at the prospect of seeing the value of their holdings increase as Fiat becaome a mega-sized auto corperation.
Genaralizations and stereotypes don't always fit.
06-16-2009, 12:11 PM
#10
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Charleston, WV
Posts: 1,505
Wouldn't call them a "POS" but they do have the lowest satisfaction in the UK, worse than Chryslers!
http://www.autoblog.com/2009/06/08/r...british-j-d-p/
What automaker has a lower owner satisfaction score in the UK than Chrysler? The one and only company that makes automobiles less tasty to UK consumers is Fiat. Both brands, which are soon to be joined at the arm rest, scored significantly below both the industry average and survey champ Lexus, which enjoyed its ninth year topping the charts. The rest of the top five are Honda, Mercedes-Benz, Skoda, and Toyota.
06-16-2009, 06:42 PM
#11
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Oakland, California
Posts: 9,710
One of the first cars that has been mentioned is bringing the Fiat 500 to North America, which the assumption has been, rebadged as a Dodge.
06-16-2009, 07:58 PM
#12
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,502
Lots 'o Fiat/Chrysler speculation here:
http://blogs.edmunds.com/straightlin...d-sebring.html
http://blogs.edmunds.com/straightlin...d-sebring.html
06-17-2009, 02:25 PM
#13
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: The Golden State
Posts: 13,711
Lots 'o Fiat/Chrysler speculation here:
http://blogs.edmunds.com/straightlin...d-sebring.html
http://blogs.edmunds.com/straightlin...d-sebring.html
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
1996LT1Z28
Middle Atlantic
3
12-04-2014 09:37 PM
1996LT1Z28
Show and Shine / Paint and Body Care
2
12-04-2014 09:20 PM