Bryan1 Posted May 9, 2014 Share Posted May 9, 2014 Why is Chrysler telling us about stuff that's going to happen in 2017 and 2018? Is this supposed to generate 'buzz'? 'excitement'? What is the point of this? "Here's a reason why you shouldn't buy any of our cars right now. They suck compared to what's coming next." --- And I'm really, really, really not feeling this whole "one brand can cover too much territory" stuff for cars. That's about the dumbest bit of dumb dumb stupidness I've seen in years. Yes, you have a point if you're talking about Ferrari, but if you're talking about Dodge----like as though people would get confused by a Dodge *car* and a Dodge *truck*, as though people are incapable of seeing the obvious similarities between objects made of metal with engines and wheels.... 'whoa... what's that? Why is that a Dodge? I thought Dodge only made these other large wheeled objects over here.' Marchionne also said investors overreacted when they sold Fiat Chrysler shares after the carmaker's presentation of an ambitious five-year plan. The company's shares fell almost 12 percent on Wednesday as analysts questioned whether Marchionne would manage to multiply sales, raise profit and slash debt, while investing 48 billion euros ($67 billion) in a global expansion led by the Jeep, Alfa Romeo and Maserati brands - and without divestments or a share issue. http://www.autonews.com/article/20140508/OEM/140509814/fiat-chrysler-headquarters-will-be-in-london-marchionne-says Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted May 9, 2014 Share Posted May 9, 2014 (edited) At this time, it's worth remembering how Dodge got started.... ..........how the Dodge brothers had a 10% stake in Ford, and how they sued Henry Ford to force him to continue paying them dividends (instead of reducing margins on the Model T) so they could use Ford profits to fund development of a rival car................ Edited May 9, 2014 by RichardJensen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted May 9, 2014 Share Posted May 9, 2014 (edited) OK I'm confused.. Fiat Chrysler may now consider Chrysler brand a domestic premium brand and Dodge an affordable performance oriented brand. but how does either brand become that without losing significant sales volume..... Sorry, having a hard time seeing the vision becoming reality, especially with Fiat wanting to broaden markets of its European brands. This is like a worse version of a bad GM plan... Edited May 9, 2014 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anthony Posted May 9, 2014 Share Posted May 9, 2014 OK I'm confused.. Fiat Chrysler may now consider Chrysler brand a domestic premium brand and Dodge an affordable performance oriented brand. but how does either brand become that without losing significant sales volume..... Sorry, having a hard time seeing the vision becoming reality, especially with Fiat wanting to broaden markets of its European brands. This is like a worse version of a bad GM plan... Chrysler is not a premium brand (nor will it be positioned as one). It will be a mainstream brand a la Toyota, Ford, etc. Your best bet is to read the linked official PDFs which are on page 1 or 2 of this thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted May 9, 2014 Share Posted May 9, 2014 (edited) Chrysler is not a premium brand (nor will it be positioned as one). It will be a mainstream brand a la Toyota, Ford, etc. Your best bet is to read the linked official PDFs which are on page 1 or 2 of this thread. Thank you, I see that FC stating in the Chrysler pdf that it's prepared to have internal competition and let buyers decide which brand they want.... I was under the impression that FG wanted to shif Chrysler brand more up market as a higher level luxury brand but now I realize that FC is splitting the brands along trim lines, not sure how that will work. Edited May 9, 2014 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anthony Posted May 10, 2014 Share Posted May 10, 2014 (edited) Thank you, I see that FC stating in the Chrysler pdf that it's prepared to have internal competition and let buyers decide which brand they want.... I was under the impression that FG wanted to shif Chrysler brand more up market as a higher level luxury brand but now I realize that FC is splitting the brands along trim lines, not sure how that will work. The PDF actually is supposed to impart they are eliminating internal competition. Hence the reason they are canceling the Avenger and the Grand Caravan (two of the vehicles pictured). They are retaining the Charger because there is only a 20% overlap in shoppers that consider both it and the 300. It made more sense when viewing the slide as part of the verbal presentation. Edited May 10, 2014 by Intrepidatious Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted May 10, 2014 Share Posted May 10, 2014 (edited) The PDF actually is supposed to impart they are eliminating internal competition. Hence the reason they are canceling the Avenger and the Grand Caravan (two of the vehicles pictured). They are retaining the Charger because there is only a 20% overlap in shoppers that consider both it and the 300. It made more sense when viewing the slide as part of the verbal presentation. OK, I like your posts and usually, you're on the money so I believe what you're saying ( a first for BON..) I wonder if FC's reinvention of Dodge will allow it to be all that the previous SRT plan promised and then some by keeping a recognized brand /dealership network and those valuable fleet sales. This could be very bad news for Chevrolet and Buick, my prediction is that GM will watch the changes and do nothing.... The big thing for Dodge and Chrysler is QUALITY, embrace that and I think Chevrolet and Buick will really feel the pinch, a good spread of products over the two brands could give existing customers real reason to cross shop. How does Ford respond, I hope that Mark Fields takes the long view and sees value in adding a few RWD niche products here and there just to keep the others honest, a Mustang-Maverick -Thunderbird ticket would shake things up but maybe Ford see more benefit pursuing affordable hybrids for economy and performance applications.... Edited May 10, 2014 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted May 10, 2014 Share Posted May 10, 2014 Dodge isn't going to last, JPD. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted May 10, 2014 Share Posted May 10, 2014 (edited) Dodge isn't going to last, JPD. While I want to see Chrysler and Dodge succeed, I do have reservation on how the intended transition will actually occur in terms of product mix and quality levels. How the various buyer demographics will respond to changes... (why the previous SRT branding attempt failed or ceased before roll out) Not meaning to start a war here with anyone, I'm simply trying to understand how or what is needed to get for where the brands are now to what FC envisions... Richard, I wonder when you say that "Dodge isn't going to last", what is to become of the whole dealer network... Edited May 10, 2014 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sullynd Posted May 10, 2014 Share Posted May 10, 2014 Richard, I wonder when you say that "Dodge isn't going to last", what is to become of the whole dealer network... Many of the Dodge stores are shared with another brand. Our freestanding dodge store used to be Saturn. It's been there for a year, and still has vinyl temporary signs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atomcat68 Posted May 11, 2014 Share Posted May 11, 2014 Maybe Alfa just should have been sold to VW. Then the RWD Alfa models could be Chryslers, making Dodge the mainstream brand. Alfa is on a fast downward spiral in it's home market. It isn't going to work here either. Fiat should have at least five models here. But oh well. At this rate, Dodge will be gone by 2020. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrewfanGRB Posted May 11, 2014 Share Posted May 11, 2014 None of this really makes any sense. Fiat really has no business being here at all, but it is "Fiat Chrysler" so I guess there has to a Fiat or 2 or 3 here. But essentially, it's Chrysler, Jeep and trucks. How hard would it have been to just dump Dodge, keep "Ram" since you've already spent God knows how much creating it, let Jeep continue to do Jeep things and make Chrysler your mainstream brand? (I realize that's effective what they ARE doing, but this all seems really messed up). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted May 11, 2014 Share Posted May 11, 2014 To me Dodge is a much stronger brand name for mainstream vehicles than Chrysler. I don't think the Ram brand has had anything to do with the sales increase. They made a better truck and threw cash on the hood. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sullynd Posted May 11, 2014 Share Posted May 11, 2014 I don't think the Ram brand has had anything to do with the sales increase. They made a better truck and threw cash on the hood. Two friends have bought "Dodge" RAMs lately. When I told them they were no longer Dodge trucks you'd think I'd told them water isn't wet. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grbeck Posted May 12, 2014 Share Posted May 12, 2014 None of this really makes any sense. Fiat really has no business being here at all, but it is "Fiat Chrysler" so I guess there has to a Fiat or 2 or 3 here. But essentially, it's Chrysler, Jeep and trucks. Having spoken with my German relatives and other Europeans about cars, the prevailing attitude in Europe seems to be that there couldn't possibly be any rational reason for Americans to prefer those stodgy Toyota and Hondas over wonderful German, Italian and French cars. Except that Americans are too dumb to know what's good for them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted May 12, 2014 Share Posted May 12, 2014 (edited) Which, ironically, is the same attitude that we tend to have toward their tolerance for unreliable, uncomfortable, delicately engineered, overly priced vehicles, because, I guess, you can pretend you're an F1 driver? And also because your ethnicity is better than all the others in the world. Edited May 12, 2014 by RichardJensen 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted May 12, 2014 Share Posted May 12, 2014 (edited) Also, those supposed Euro Luxury brands sold in the US tend to be considered more like premium brands with wider usage in their European home markets.. European car market is so parochial, most buyers there see euro produced vehicles as the best and rest of the world as cheap imitators, it doesn't help that their collective governments jealously protect those markets and tax to bias purchasing trends, those poor sods think fuel costs $10/gallon everywhere else. Europeans think we are insane for driving such thirsty vehicles, yet when you consider the cost of fuel, the Euros pay more even with those efficient diesels. Edited May 12, 2014 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grbeck Posted May 12, 2014 Share Posted May 12, 2014 (edited) Europeans drive fewer miles annually than Americans do, and a significant percentage of them receive a car for personal use as a company-provided "perk." This is a way around very high tax rates on higher incomes. The car isn't taxed, as additional income would be, because the company, not the employee, buys the car and retains ownership of it. Under those circumstances, reliability becomes less important. Americans drive more, and pay for both the car and any out-of-warranty repairs out of their own pocket. Edited May 12, 2014 by grbeck Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted May 13, 2014 Share Posted May 13, 2014 (edited) Europeans drive fewer miles annually than Americans do, and a significant percentage of them receive a car for personal use as a company-provided "perk." This is a way around very high tax rates on higher incomes. The car isn't taxed, as additional income would be, because the company, not the employee, buys the car and retains ownership of it. Under those circumstances, reliability becomes less important. Americans drive more, and pay for both the car and any out-of-warranty repairs out of their own pocket. Around 50% of vehicle sales in Europe are company vehicles, it's a sure bet that EU governments there encourage businesses to do it via tax benefits. So in the wash up, those drivers with "take home" cars have either a novated lease or no costs to bear - the company leases those efficient vehicles. And it's also the reason why VW group goes after fleet sales with such aggressive sales pitches, there's a lot volume for plants. There's still around 50% of sales that are retail and those people do feel the sting of higher taxes and fuel prices - that too affects their vehicle choices. Edited May 13, 2014 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
630land Posted May 14, 2014 Share Posted May 14, 2014 What is funny to me is some who use 'Dodge' for the whole company, instead of Mopar or Chrysler Corp. From NASCAR and pickups, they assume 'Dodge' builds the Hemis, etc. But Richard J. is right, Dodge as a 'performance brand' may flop and get cut. It has a 'gas hog' image, which turns off some buyers, and Fiat is not 100% behind the name, since they renamed the trucks to Rams. Ford and Chevy can sell trucks, small cars, and RWD sporty cars all in one dealer, but FCA? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.