Ram moving back across the border?

spud1957 wrote:
There have been more jobs lost in the auto industry to automation than moving plants outside the US. If the desire is to save American jobs, why don't I hear anyone beating on that drum.

Do you mean, stop automation and go back to manual assembly? Seems to me that would be the inediate end of any manufacturer. How would they compete?

There have been more jobs lost in the auto industry to automation than moving plants outside the US. If the desire is to save American jobs, why don't I hear anyone beating on that drum.

travelnutz wrote:
. . . . Copied and pasted form Michigan Business article 01/08/17 for 2016 vehicle sales:

"Success of Ford and GM contrasted with FCA US sales data for December, which showed a 10-percent year-over-year decline to 192,519 units. Chrysler brands were down 32 percent, while FIAT brands were down 54 percent." . . . . .

Agree, as a whole FCA (Chrysler and Fiat) is not doing well in the US. However, the Ram and Jeep brands are doing well. Ram, as of 2009, became a quasi-independent entity which bodes well for its ability to make some strategic decisions apart from other FCA product divisions. Ram increased its market share 5 percent from 2010 to 2015 (with similar gains so far in 2016). In 2010 Ram produced 200,000 trucks, in 2015, 451,000. Their plants are running at capacity. Ram is undoubtedly FCA CEO Sergio Marchionne's sacred cash cow. Let's hope Marchionne doesn't mess with a good thing.

mich800 wrote:

Where did I mention the President or "dictator"? You said companies are not politically driven. But the business environment relative to other countries or localities both in costs and stability does in fact have an impact on where and how business operate.

True. Didn't Toyota lead the charge (Japansese & Asian automakers) to establish manufacturing facilities in the US decades ago because of A: US demand for their vehicles, and B: To dodge import tariffs on Japanese vehicles in place at the time?

tomman58 wrote:

mich800 wrote:

tomman58 wrote:
Car companys are not politically driven they are drive by economics. We have always had a world relationship in the car world. Big business dances to its own music.

And who sets the tax and regulatory environment for business that directly impact their profitability?

Answer .... the world. Certainly not just a dictator of one country or another. Business is profit driven and will make cars as close to their market as possible. Here in America we buy lots of cars and that is why we are producing them. That is not to say that government doesn't aide them or keep them in check (ie: air bags issues, diesel emissions, and mileage requirements). The congress sets some rules not the president, he can only suggest.

Where did I mention the President or "dictator"? You said companies are not politically driven. But the business environment relative to other countries or localities both in costs and stability does in fact have an impact on where and how business operate.

mich800 wrote:

tomman58 wrote:
Car companys are not politically driven they are drive by economics. We have always had a world relationship in the car world. Big business dances to its own music.

And who sets the tax and regulatory environment for business that directly impact their profitability?

Answer .... the world. Certainly not just a dictator of one country or another. Business is profit driven and will make cars as close to their market as possible. Here in America we buy lots of cars and that is why we are producing them. That is not to say that government doesn't aide them or keep them in check (ie: air bags issues, diesel emissions, and mileage requirements). The congress sets some rules not the president, he can only suggest.

pianotuna wrote:
The big three have been brought to their knees by off shore vehicles.

Note that Toyota is on this list of top paid CEO's. But look at it closely. Maybe they have been taken down by salaries they pay management.

John & Angela wrote:

billyray50 wrote:
This was Announced in Sept. 2015. But a car division going to Mexico. Nothing to do with Trump.

You beat me to it. It was actually in discussion last spring 2016 but I'm sure the Donald will take credit for it. LOL. This gets funnier everyday.

Oh King Twitter will!! lol

The big 3 or 2-1/2 is closer to the truth

1 = Ford, 1= GM, and 1/2 = FCA/Fiat

Copied  and pasted form Michigan Business article 01/08/17 for 2016 vehicle sales:

 "Success of Ford and GM contrasted with FCA US sales data for December, which showed a 10-percent year-over-year decline to 192,519 units. Chrysler brands were down 32 percent, while FIAT brands were down 54 percent."

I'm happy to see FCA/Fia are going to finally do something for our workers and market here in the USA. However, spending 1 billion dollars of newly borrowed money when your sales have tanked may only hasten the final demise of the entity. The word "potential" for moving 2500 and 3500 Ram truck production/assembly back to the USA is very telling as they are still activily seeking another manufacturer etc to merger FCA/Fiat in. Realy makes them less palatable than presently and they have not had anyone interested in taking them in yet without having that another billion dollars of debt. Will be very interedting to watch!

tomman58 wrote:
Car companys are not politically driven they are drive by economics. We have always had a world relationship in the car world. Big business dances to its own music.

And who sets the tax and regulatory environment for business that directly impact their profitability?