Forum Discussion
itguy08 wrote:
Chrysler should have died in the 80's when Iacocca was first begging for cash from Uncle Sam. Like all the other defunct brands they would not be missed one bit by the general public.
Well now, that is a very intelligent insight.
I have owned many GM, Ford, and Chrysler vehicles over the years, some good, some not so good from all 3. It is my sincere hope that they all thrive.
I just cannot understand what Sergio is doing. He is going to destroy FCA with his constant talking. Enough is enough. If I were in his position (63 yrs old, $150 million in retirement money), I would just shut up and sell cars and be thankful for what I have.IdaD wrote:
Edit - You can always just buy another Tundra. You defend that thing like a momma bear anytime somebody slights it, so you obviously like it.
I love my Tundra because I keep it within my weights and it works great. The kids are growing and the amount of******we take with us keeps growing too. I expect to outgrow the capabilities of my beloved Tundra within 5 years :(.
I don't have blind brand allegiance though. The Tundra was the best product at the best pricepoint for my needs in 2010. Based upon my research, the Ram 3/4 ton is currently the front runner for the best product at the best pricepoint for my future needs. If Toyota makes a 3/4 ton truck by then, I will certainly research and consider it.itguy08 wrote:
hone eagle wrote:
Jeep, minivan ,ram trucks will live on ....the rest who knows.
Why would GM keep the Ram trucks? They already have trucks that are light years ahead of anything FCA builds.
Jeep is about the only thing that is worth anything to GM. Minivan would not interest them as it's a declining segment and the only reason people pick the Mopar units is because they are CHEAP. GM tried that and exited that market.
Chrysler should have died in the 80's when Iacocca was first begging for cash from Uncle Sam. Like all the other defunct brands they would not be missed one bit by the general public.
Ram sold for cash ,GM would keep the other two?
When amana bought maytag did either one disappear ?
They could mourf into each other ?
The CEO of Chrysler has made no secret of the need to share development costs,its no wonder he delayed all development in Auburn Hills until 2016- coincidence ?
I think not.
That delay on new model development is the death nell of FCA if they don't get a partneritguy08 wrote:
hone eagle wrote:
Jeep, minivan ,ram trucks will live on ....the rest who knows.
Why would GM keep the Ram trucks? They already have trucks that are light years ahead of anything FCA builds.
Jeep is about the only thing that is worth anything to GM. Minivan would not interest them as it's a declining segment and the only reason people pick the Mopar units is because they are CHEAP. GM tried that and exited that market.
Chrysler should have died in the 80's when Iacocca was first begging for cash from Uncle Sam. Like all the other defunct brands they would not be missed one bit by the general public.
Actually it's the other way around, why would FCA keep the GM trucks?!
As far as the minivan goes GM dropped out of that market because they couldn't build anything worthwhile to anyone! There is a reason the Mopar minivans are still around, no one can build anything competitive!
As far as anyone missing Chrysler....there are quite a bit that would miss them. They build some of the best cars on the road. Despite what some consumer magazine editors opinion thinks!goducks10 wrote:
philh wrote:
FCA is 18-24 months from bankruptcy.
Wasn't GM in the same boat at one time?
GM went through a bastardized Chapter 11 Bankruptcy
Chrysler when through a bastardized Chapter 7 bankruptcy
Peter DeLorenzo has been writing on the auto industry for a couple of decades. His analysis is always spot on. This particular article is probably the best he has written.
http://www.autoextremist.com/current/2015/6/7/brother-sergios-traveling-salvation-show-is-running-out-of-g.html- I've said this here a few years ago that Chrysler is losing to the competition because they're slowly outsourcing there powertrain and not developing the engineering talent in house. Now that the CAFE standards are creeping into the near term, Chrysler's finding they're not in position to meet these targets.
Marchionne sounds desperate and appears to be taken even more drastic measures to get this effort off high center, and any hostile takeover or force GM to merge will end in disaster for both companies.
Like the saying: Easy come... Easy go!
More News hone eagle wrote:
Jeep, minivan ,ram trucks will live on ....the rest who knows.
Why would GM keep the Ram trucks? They already have trucks that are light years ahead of anything FCA builds.
Jeep is about the only thing that is worth anything to GM. Minivan would not interest them as it's a declining segment and the only reason people pick the Mopar units is because they are CHEAP. GM tried that and exited that market.
Chrysler should have died in the 80's when Iacocca was first begging for cash from Uncle Sam. Like all the other defunct brands they would not be missed one bit by the general public.philh wrote:
FCA is 18-24 months from bankruptcy.
Wasn't GM in the same boat at one time?spoon059 wrote:
philh wrote:
FCA is 18-24 months from bankruptcy.
I hope not... I'm 3-4 years from buying a new truck and really hoped it would be a Ram Megacab... =(
Ram, Jeep, Dodge - they're all valuable brands and are worth too much as going concerns to be simply scrapped. Ram and Jeep in particular have been selling very well. That doesn't mean FCA won't go down or be split up, but I don't see those brands going away in this country.
GM and Chrysler both recently went through bankruptcies and both are still operating and selling vehicles.
Edit - You can always just buy another Tundra. You defend that thing like a momma bear anytime somebody slights it, so you obviously like it.philh wrote:
FCA is 18-24 months from bankruptcy.
I hope not... I'm 3-4 years from buying a new truck and really hoped it would be a Ram Megacab... =(
