You won't need much more proof than this that Chrysler is being run into the ground.
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 13,713
From: The Golden State
You won't need much more proof than this that Chrysler is being run into the ground.
http://www.detnews.com/2003/autosins...a01-282766.htm
http://www.detnews.com/2003/autosins...a01-281928.htm
Back when Mercedes took over Chrysler, they killed or put on hold everything Chrysler had in the pipeline that wasn't too far along to stall. Now they are paying for it with massive sales losses, layoffs, and new products late to the market.
Mercedes also seems to have absolutely no understanding of the US market, now selling 220,000 fewer Chryslers than they did when they 1st took over the company (Minivan sales alone are down by 100,000 vehicles!). Industry sales are up 9%, and Chrysler's is down 13%.
The low cost M80 which was a hit on the auto circuit was pulled from production plans at the last minute, Jeep sales have seriously dropped (the Compass of some years ago was supposed to be the Wrangler's replacement by now, but is still at least a year and a half away from production), the overpriced Pacifica (perfect example of a really good vehicle being priced too high) is not selling well, forcing DC to create a "stripper" model, still in the upper 20s, the 300C is expected to push $40,000 (Magnum is expected to be over $30,000), the Crossfire hasn't caught on, and most telling, Chrysler's biggest successes are vehicles designed & created by the old Chrysler people, the PT Cruiser & the Dodge Ram.
Meanwhile, the Razor is stalled, the sports coupe (the so called Charger) to my knowledge is still on a holding pattern because of Germany, the $32,000 soon to be 500 hp Lightning is being challenged by a Ram that makes the same HP, but is likely to cost 20,000 more!
Sorry for ranting, but when I first purchased 100 shares 10 years ago, my initial $1200 was worth just over 8 grand (
!) when Mercedes Benz took over and Chrysler was poised with a truckful of new models within 3-4 years. Now that initial investment is worth $3600. More than I started with, but less than half what it was when Mercedes took over, and those new products still aren't on the road.
I just wish I had traded my Chrysler stocks & bought GM stocks in 98 while Chrysler was riding high, and GM was being run badly by a group of people whose claim to fame was managing detergent and eyeglass companies.
http://www.detnews.com/2003/autosins...a01-281928.htm
Back when Mercedes took over Chrysler, they killed or put on hold everything Chrysler had in the pipeline that wasn't too far along to stall. Now they are paying for it with massive sales losses, layoffs, and new products late to the market.
Mercedes also seems to have absolutely no understanding of the US market, now selling 220,000 fewer Chryslers than they did when they 1st took over the company (Minivan sales alone are down by 100,000 vehicles!). Industry sales are up 9%, and Chrysler's is down 13%.
The low cost M80 which was a hit on the auto circuit was pulled from production plans at the last minute, Jeep sales have seriously dropped (the Compass of some years ago was supposed to be the Wrangler's replacement by now, but is still at least a year and a half away from production), the overpriced Pacifica (perfect example of a really good vehicle being priced too high) is not selling well, forcing DC to create a "stripper" model, still in the upper 20s, the 300C is expected to push $40,000 (Magnum is expected to be over $30,000), the Crossfire hasn't caught on, and most telling, Chrysler's biggest successes are vehicles designed & created by the old Chrysler people, the PT Cruiser & the Dodge Ram.
Meanwhile, the Razor is stalled, the sports coupe (the so called Charger) to my knowledge is still on a holding pattern because of Germany, the $32,000 soon to be 500 hp Lightning is being challenged by a Ram that makes the same HP, but is likely to cost 20,000 more!
Sorry for ranting, but when I first purchased 100 shares 10 years ago, my initial $1200 was worth just over 8 grand (
!) when Mercedes Benz took over and Chrysler was poised with a truckful of new models within 3-4 years. Now that initial investment is worth $3600. More than I started with, but less than half what it was when Mercedes took over, and those new products still aren't on the road.I just wish I had traded my Chrysler stocks & bought GM stocks in 98 while Chrysler was riding high, and GM was being run badly by a group of people whose claim to fame was managing detergent and eyeglass companies.
Last edited by guionM; Sep 29, 2003 at 09:52 AM.
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 2,979
Guion,
One thing that should also be pointed out is that the terrific cost pressure that GM is putting on them can't be helping things. If the Germans don't understand one thing about this market, it is this very issue.
GM is using it's one greatest asset, sheer size, to grind the competition down.
Chrysler is just the first company in the grinder. Ford is most likely next.
Now, let's play hypothetical for a moment...
Should Chrysler be broken up to be sold off, GM wants one group in particular - Jeep/Truck. They've got the cash to absorb it quickly, combine it with the Hummer brand, throw the economy of scale of the GMT-800 platform into the mix, and then turn on Ford.
With the Dodge trucks thrown into the mix, GMT-900's volume would quickly pass 2,000,000 units, and pose nearly an insurmountable competitive barrier from an economic standpoint. But I wonder if the Dodge name would survive at all...
Imagine Chevrolet dealerships selling Jeeps and Hummers...
Sad to say it, but Chrysler's cars aren't worth anything. While I like individual models quite a bit (Crossfire, Neon SRT-4), the rest of the lineup is a dead-end. If it is part of the line-up in the purchase, shut them down and close the plants.
One thing that should also be pointed out is that the terrific cost pressure that GM is putting on them can't be helping things. If the Germans don't understand one thing about this market, it is this very issue.
GM is using it's one greatest asset, sheer size, to grind the competition down.
Chrysler is just the first company in the grinder. Ford is most likely next.
Now, let's play hypothetical for a moment...
Should Chrysler be broken up to be sold off, GM wants one group in particular - Jeep/Truck. They've got the cash to absorb it quickly, combine it with the Hummer brand, throw the economy of scale of the GMT-800 platform into the mix, and then turn on Ford.
With the Dodge trucks thrown into the mix, GMT-900's volume would quickly pass 2,000,000 units, and pose nearly an insurmountable competitive barrier from an economic standpoint. But I wonder if the Dodge name would survive at all...
Imagine Chevrolet dealerships selling Jeeps and Hummers...
Sad to say it, but Chrysler's cars aren't worth anything. While I like individual models quite a bit (Crossfire, Neon SRT-4), the rest of the lineup is a dead-end. If it is part of the line-up in the purchase, shut them down and close the plants.
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 9,705
From: Oakland, California
Investing rule number 1: Never invest with your heart instead of your head. In other words, don't invest in something you're passionate about.
I made a stupid investment several years ago in a little start-up company that was building a replacement for the ICE that weighed less than 100-lbs and cranked out as much HP as a sbc.
When big names like Carroll Shelby and Smokey Yunick got involved, I got more excited as the stock ran up from the $5/share price I paid to $28/share within days. I should have sold then, but I believed in the concept so I held out because I just knew within months one of the big three would buy them out because of government regulations requiring cleaner burning powerplants. Boy was I wrong. Its now trading at about 35¢ a share.
http://www.ox2engine.com/home.htm
I made a stupid investment several years ago in a little start-up company that was building a replacement for the ICE that weighed less than 100-lbs and cranked out as much HP as a sbc.
When big names like Carroll Shelby and Smokey Yunick got involved, I got more excited as the stock ran up from the $5/share price I paid to $28/share within days. I should have sold then, but I believed in the concept so I held out because I just knew within months one of the big three would buy them out because of government regulations requiring cleaner burning powerplants. Boy was I wrong. Its now trading at about 35¢ a share.
http://www.ox2engine.com/home.htm
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 4,600
From: Pewee Valley, KY
If GM did buy Jeep/Dodge would they still keep the Hemi? I would think so. Also wouldn't it be cool if they did the M80 and Razor concept. Throw the Razor on Kappa and get it on the road quick. Put the M80 on the colorado platform. Keep the new Ram where it is w/ Hemi. That would be an awesome buisiness case for GM to buy it.
Registered User
Joined: Jul 1999
Posts: 2,072
From: Lilburn, GA, USA
Originally posted by PacerX
Imagine Chevrolet dealerships selling Jeeps and Hummers...
Imagine Chevrolet dealerships selling Jeeps and Hummers...
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 1,531
Sounds like there would be way too much product overlap. What with Dodge and Chevy trucks going head to head. There would need to be some major reorganization, major model lines obliterated etc.. There might be some benefit in gaining some technology, but I don't see much more beyond that. Boy the Mopar boys would be royaly pi$$ed.
Jeep by itself may be a good buy...Hummer dealerships could partner with it easily I think.
IMO, though, there are many better things to spend money on....pension included.
Jeep by itself may be a good buy...Hummer dealerships could partner with it easily I think.
IMO, though, there are many better things to spend money on....pension included.
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 2,400
From: Michigan's left coast
Well, the first thing to to remember that Chrysler folk are about the most loyal that I know. While the Jeep people don't care who owns the brand as long as their vehicles still kick ***, the guys buying the Rams would be very adverse to making that same purchase if the vehicle was being produced by GM. Likely, they'd jump ship to Nissan or Toyota (whichever one is smart enough to start producing a diesel), especially if GM killed off the Cummins. So, I can see Jeep going to GM, but Dodge Truck? Never - it'd be massive failure.
On the car side, I'll admit there isn't much without the LX (which would lose a lot as soon as the lines to M-B are severed). The Neon is outdated and will be replaced by a Mistu product, and the JS midsize replacement is a ways off yet.
On the car side, I'll admit there isn't much without the LX (which would lose a lot as soon as the lines to M-B are severed). The Neon is outdated and will be replaced by a Mistu product, and the JS midsize replacement is a ways off yet.
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 578
From: N. Providence, RI
The autoextremist has had several good rants about this in the past...If interested, you can go to his page and look in the archives.
The biggest disappointment with the DCX takeover is D-B's refusal to treat Dodge as anything but an abortion of an afterthought. The two have been together since 1998, and only now are we seeing any kinds of parts sharing...(In this case, the Crossfire, and even that's using parts obsolete to D-B)
If D-B wasn't so worried about their precious upmarket reputation, they would’ve realized that association with Dodge doesn’t necessarily bring them down…Instead, D-B should’ve been trying to improve Dodge across the board: efficiency, parts-sharing, build quality, top-notch design, and getting must-have products to the market. (Chrysler’s sole must-have product for years is still the Viper…great car, but too costly for you and me…) I remember spending 3 hours with a crowd just staring at the Charger concept at the 1999 auto show in Atlanta. The fact that it didn’t get built borders on corporate negligence. (and I don’t believe the "not enough $$$" line from DCX; M-B hasn’t had any delays with their new products recently.)
M-B’s paradox is that they want Chrysler to have good products and make a profit, but not so good that they undercut their own…Maybe that’s how they planned it all along. Maybe they just wanted the profitability of the truck line, and to hell with the rest…Maybe it was true that they just wanted a ready-made infrastructure in the U.S. to build cars; I don’t know and I don’t care anymore…What I do know is it’s a criminal tragedy to another once-proud carmaker that’s been around since the beginning, soon to join the likes of Plymouth and Oldsmobile.
The biggest disappointment with the DCX takeover is D-B's refusal to treat Dodge as anything but an abortion of an afterthought. The two have been together since 1998, and only now are we seeing any kinds of parts sharing...(In this case, the Crossfire, and even that's using parts obsolete to D-B)
If D-B wasn't so worried about their precious upmarket reputation, they would’ve realized that association with Dodge doesn’t necessarily bring them down…Instead, D-B should’ve been trying to improve Dodge across the board: efficiency, parts-sharing, build quality, top-notch design, and getting must-have products to the market. (Chrysler’s sole must-have product for years is still the Viper…great car, but too costly for you and me…) I remember spending 3 hours with a crowd just staring at the Charger concept at the 1999 auto show in Atlanta. The fact that it didn’t get built borders on corporate negligence. (and I don’t believe the "not enough $$$" line from DCX; M-B hasn’t had any delays with their new products recently.)
M-B’s paradox is that they want Chrysler to have good products and make a profit, but not so good that they undercut their own…Maybe that’s how they planned it all along. Maybe they just wanted the profitability of the truck line, and to hell with the rest…Maybe it was true that they just wanted a ready-made infrastructure in the U.S. to build cars; I don’t know and I don’t care anymore…What I do know is it’s a criminal tragedy to another once-proud carmaker that’s been around since the beginning, soon to join the likes of Plymouth and Oldsmobile.
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 13,713
From: The Golden State
I understand and agree with you PacerX, but last year Mercedes' CEO Jurgen Schremmp actually admitted in an interview that their purpose was takeing over Chrysler (vs a merger of equals), and their prime goal was to get ahold of Jeep!
With that as a backdrop, it's obvious that DCX had no intention of doing anything with Chrysler outside of sucking it's profits without any real investment, raiding it's cash reserves (in the late 90s Chrysler had massive cash reserves for as small as it was), and converting it to not much more than a profitable distributor for rental cars & Mitsubishis.
Sure, GM is using it's muscle to squeeze everyone else out. But both it's competitors have been weakened by their own hand as well. Ford with a series of bad introductions, and major recalls primarily due to excess penny pinching, and Chrysler because Daimler Benz sucked it dry of cash & product till it absolutely had to spend money on it.
In 1998, Chrysler had 9 billion in reserves (yes, nine BILLION!!!) after clearing just over 3 billion in 1997 (Chrysler gained 50% of the profit with less than 1/3 of the sales of General Motors
(GM cleared just over $6 1/2 billion and Ford slightly more). In 2002, after slashing 26,000 jobs and closing 6 plants to "stem losses" (in 2001, Chrysler still managed to clear almost $600 million, so what losses were they talking about?), yet the cash reserves were gone and all new products save the new Ram & the restyled Neon were shelved.
If Chrysler's new products had come online on time instead of DCX using the Chrysler's money to fund an 11% wage increase for it's German workers, and MB's product expansion programs, Chrysler would no doubt be in top condition to keep up with GM in the market place.
What GM is doing is pretty devious, but at least you can write it off to competition. What Daimler did to Chrysler (it's own division) under false pretenses is downright horrendous.
Chrysler has alot of good stuff waiting, but getting DCX to greenlight it is another story.
More DCX analysis:
http://www.msnbc.com/news/969677.asp
With that as a backdrop, it's obvious that DCX had no intention of doing anything with Chrysler outside of sucking it's profits without any real investment, raiding it's cash reserves (in the late 90s Chrysler had massive cash reserves for as small as it was), and converting it to not much more than a profitable distributor for rental cars & Mitsubishis.
Sure, GM is using it's muscle to squeeze everyone else out. But both it's competitors have been weakened by their own hand as well. Ford with a series of bad introductions, and major recalls primarily due to excess penny pinching, and Chrysler because Daimler Benz sucked it dry of cash & product till it absolutely had to spend money on it.
In 1998, Chrysler had 9 billion in reserves (yes, nine BILLION!!!) after clearing just over 3 billion in 1997 (Chrysler gained 50% of the profit with less than 1/3 of the sales of General Motors
(GM cleared just over $6 1/2 billion and Ford slightly more). In 2002, after slashing 26,000 jobs and closing 6 plants to "stem losses" (in 2001, Chrysler still managed to clear almost $600 million, so what losses were they talking about?), yet the cash reserves were gone and all new products save the new Ram & the restyled Neon were shelved. If Chrysler's new products had come online on time instead of DCX using the Chrysler's money to fund an 11% wage increase for it's German workers, and MB's product expansion programs, Chrysler would no doubt be in top condition to keep up with GM in the market place.
What GM is doing is pretty devious, but at least you can write it off to competition. What Daimler did to Chrysler (it's own division) under false pretenses is downright horrendous.
Chrysler has alot of good stuff waiting, but getting DCX to greenlight it is another story.
More DCX analysis:
http://www.msnbc.com/news/969677.asp
Last edited by guionM; Sep 29, 2003 at 03:57 PM.
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 1,440
From: five-one-oh/nine-oh-nine
i agree, this IS criminal. there should be a law suite filed against the company on behalf of all the Chrysler shareholders. there is definite neglegence here and being a public company it should be held accountable. i wouldn't mind seeing "Shrimp" or whatever his friz face is called stripped of his earnings and put in jail for 5-10 years.
at the vary least there should be a campaign started to boycotting M-B. they want to run Chrysler into the ground? how about we run M-B into the ground right alongside?
at the vary least there should be a campaign started to boycotting M-B. they want to run Chrysler into the ground? how about we run M-B into the ground right alongside?
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 293
From: Hou,TX
Originally posted by morb|d
i agree, this IS criminal. there should be a law suite filed against the company on behalf of all the Chrysler shareholders. there is definite neglegence here and being a public company it should be held accountable. i wouldn't mind seeing "Shrimp" or whatever his friz face is called stripped of his earnings and put in jail for 5-10 years.
at the vary least there should be a campaign started to boycotting M-B. they want to run Chrysler into the ground? how about we run M-B into the ground right alongside?
i agree, this IS criminal. there should be a law suite filed against the company on behalf of all the Chrysler shareholders. there is definite neglegence here and being a public company it should be held accountable. i wouldn't mind seeing "Shrimp" or whatever his friz face is called stripped of his earnings and put in jail for 5-10 years.
at the vary least there should be a campaign started to boycotting M-B. they want to run Chrysler into the ground? how about we run M-B into the ground right alongside?
Registered User
Joined: Aug 1999
Posts: 781
From: Houston TX (Chicago/Evanston IL)
This is a touchy subject for me. I know we live in a "world economy" but I will never buy an obvious **** product. I really didn't want my wife to buy the srt-4. The German "war machine" attitude still remains in a economic sence. We should have never helped them rebuild after the war. If we treated there country like they treated Crapler. It would be a third world country along the same lines as most of the former USSR. I would wager that if Crysler goes under there will be legal mess to follow. I say put a 50% tax on all German cars over the high volume car sales price average. Then watch them poor money into dodge and company.
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 16,176
From: Chicagoland IL
Thought that this was a good place to add this little story from AutoNews.
Schrempp quits NYSE board
Reuters / September 29, 2003
BERLIN -- DaimlerChrysler AG CEO Juergen Schrempp has stepped down from the New York Stock Exchange board after the scandal that led to the ousting of CEO Richard Grasso over a $140 million payout.
A spokesman for automaker said Sunday that Schrempp was leaving the NYSE board over the Grasso affair.
Grasso quit earlier this month after 35 years at the NYSE following a storm of criticism over his $140 million paycheck.
"Schrempp is interested in a new definition of the board and the leadership post," the Daimler spokesman said, adding that Schrempp had long called for a new start at the NYSE.
The spokesman added that Schrempp had also found it increasingly hard to take part in board meetings. Schrempp's term would have expired next year.
Schrempp does not belong to the compensation committee that decided on Grasso's package and the Welt am Sonntag newspaper on Sunday reported that the DaimlerChrysler boss had raised critical questions over the issue at a board meeting in mid-August.
John Reed took over as interim chairman and chief executive of the exchange on Friday, with a number of officials close to Grasso expected to leave. Reed made a clean sweep when he became chairman of Citicorp in the 1980s.
On Thursday, H. Carl McCall, who led the exchange briefly after Grasso resigned, also stepped down. He was the lead director of the board and head of its compensation committee.
Investors and corporate governance experts said that McCall's resignation was a positive step, but that many more board resignations would be necessary if the exchange was to be perceived as cleaning up its act.
Schrempp quits NYSE board
Reuters / September 29, 2003
BERLIN -- DaimlerChrysler AG CEO Juergen Schrempp has stepped down from the New York Stock Exchange board after the scandal that led to the ousting of CEO Richard Grasso over a $140 million payout.
A spokesman for automaker said Sunday that Schrempp was leaving the NYSE board over the Grasso affair.
Grasso quit earlier this month after 35 years at the NYSE following a storm of criticism over his $140 million paycheck.
"Schrempp is interested in a new definition of the board and the leadership post," the Daimler spokesman said, adding that Schrempp had long called for a new start at the NYSE.
The spokesman added that Schrempp had also found it increasingly hard to take part in board meetings. Schrempp's term would have expired next year.
Schrempp does not belong to the compensation committee that decided on Grasso's package and the Welt am Sonntag newspaper on Sunday reported that the DaimlerChrysler boss had raised critical questions over the issue at a board meeting in mid-August.
John Reed took over as interim chairman and chief executive of the exchange on Friday, with a number of officials close to Grasso expected to leave. Reed made a clean sweep when he became chairman of Citicorp in the 1980s.
On Thursday, H. Carl McCall, who led the exchange briefly after Grasso resigned, also stepped down. He was the lead director of the board and head of its compensation committee.
Investors and corporate governance experts said that McCall's resignation was a positive step, but that many more board resignations would be necessary if the exchange was to be perceived as cleaning up its act.
