Archives

http://www.cleanmpg.com/photos/data/2/AmericanFlag.jpg Conventional wisdom would say Fiat is racing Chrysler off the cliff (http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20091006/OPINION03/910060323/0/AUTO01/So-far--Fiat-leaders-fail-to-impress-at-Chrysler)

http://www.cleanmpg.com/photos/data/501/marchionne.jpgDaniel Howes - DETROITNEWS (http://www.detroitnews.com) - Nov 2, 2009

Hold tight and see if this somehow works out --Ed.

Don't know whether Sergio Marchionne and the boys from Fiat SpA -- men of fewer words than Bob Nardelli -- can save Chrysler Group LLC. But know this:

They're good at cashiering Chrysler execs, the latest wave coming Monday. Second, they're prepared to defy received wisdom, namely the conviction that spreading scarce resources over fewer brands (say Ford, Toyota and Honda) is preferable to the opposite.

Apparently not so in Auburn Hills, where the Italian cut to things includes creating a separate Ram truck brand out of Dodge (now, amid a greening America?) and pushing Chrysler upscale (again). Meaning Chrysler is on track to field as many U.S. brands as rival General Motors Co., a dubious first in an industry where fewer typically ends up being worth more.

And third: The White Knights of Torino aren't held to the same rules as GM. Its marketing plans, executive pay decisions, plant and product calls, cultural change efforts, board members -- you name it -- are all a) public and b) influenced by minions in the U.S. Treasury and the few White House staffers still seconded to the auto bailouts.... http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20091006/OPINION03/910060323/0/AUTO01/So-far--Fiat-leaders-fail-to-impress-at-Chrysler

Link to article incorrect: missing the r from Detroit.

It makes sense to separate brands for any of the following reasons:
1) You want to close one of more brands. It's easier to do later if you begin untangling them sooner.
2) You want to sell one or more of the brands. See 1).
3) You have significant reputation issues and want to protect reputations of the good parts from the bad parts.

It also makes sense for Fiat to move the Chrysler brand upmarket if Fiat wants to sell Fiat cars as the mass-market brand.

Link to article incorrect: missing the r from Detroit.Link fixed

It makes sense to separate brands for any of the following reasons:
1) You want to close one of more brands. It's easier to do later if you begin untangling them sooner.
2) You want to sell one or more of the brands. See 1).
3) You have significant reputation issues and want to protect reputations of the good parts from the bad parts.

It also makes sense for Fiat to move the Chrysler brand upmarket if Fiat wants to sell Fiat cars as the mass-market brand.

+1 This is absolutely correct. What they are doing is what Chrysler should have been doing.

It makes sense to separate brands for any of the following reasons:
1) You want to close one of more brands. It's easier to do later if you begin untangling them sooner.
2) You want to sell one or more of the brands. See 1).
3) You have significant reputation issues and want to protect reputations of the good parts from the bad parts.

It also makes sense for Fiat to move the Chrysler brand upmarket if Fiat wants to sell Fiat cars as the mass-market brand.

If you're right it sounds like the Dodge brand is done.

If you're right it sounds like the Dodge brand is done.

I could see Dodge evolving into a "truck only" brand, which I don't think would be a bad thing. Jeep has this niche now and it seems to serve it well.

If you're right it sounds like the Dodge brand is done.

Well, I was thinking more that theyd' be able to sell off Ram if things don't work out.