Forum Discussion
FishOnOne wrote:
Are there any successful or good looking vehicles that Chrysler has released under the Fiat moniker. I will say that the 200 is probably the closest thing to good looking, but I rarely even see one on the road.
It seams that Fiat is just adding small updates (new grills, interior tweaks, etc) to vehicles that were designed by the Daimler moniker.
They have problems with their cars globally. Jeep has quality issues, the actual FIAT cars are struggling. Only their CNH/iVECO division is going well- Are there any successful or good looking vehicles that Chrysler has released under the Fiat moniker. I will say that the 200 is probably the closest thing to good looking, but I rarely even see one on the road.
It seams that Fiat is just adding small updates (new grills, interior tweaks, etc) to vehicles that were designed by the Daimler moniker. travelnutz wrote:
FCA is asking to so called "merge" not Ford or GM, as FCA sees the handwriting on the wall and what the future has in store for them if they don't. Merging with nothing to really offer that's truely positive is called a "sale" before a fire sale or a bankruptcy auction. Why do you think this widely published story of facts will not go away? Simply because it's factual!
Marchionne has said before that FCA, needs a third partner, they are too small Globally to weather development costs of new vehicles by themselves
FCA needs a partner to defray costsCampfire Time wrote:
dodge guy wrote:
It's just a matter of time before GM will realize they can't wait for anyone else to help them out.
Eventually GM will be crawling back to FCA and begging for help. And then it will probably be at half of the original offer!
Why? What does GM need them for? GM is doing well. Just look at the sales numbers. Drive one or two of their cars and trucks. The sole reason it's stock is where it is has to do with trust, which a large segment of the public doesn't, your post illustrates that well. GM isn't the same company it was 20 years ago. Heck it isn't the same company it was 5 years ago. Not too long ago a Cadillac would not be mentioned in the same article as BMW or Mercedes. Now they are making better cars than BMW (read up on the ATS). But the general public just doesn't get that yet. Most BMW owners are afraid to admit in public that their favorite brand is often bested by what used to be known as "The standard of the world".
Unfortunately perception is reality, and I don't care who owns or partners with them, it's going to take years for GM to regain the reputation they once enjoyed in their heyday.
Right about the general public does not get that, as the sales numbers for Cadillac and Ford 's Lincoln are pretty ordinary- No smoke ,check the transaction prices FCA are the lowest.How many posts have we here "had to buy the Ram it was $$$$$ cheaper"
The sales are made at the loss of the profit needed to pay for the next truck- no profit - no truck.
Marchione knows better then anyone there is no time left for Chrysler, in 18 months it will be in a world of hurt. - FishOnOne,
Just the tip of the iceberg and having mirros with no reflectivity also. Just a matter of time until... hone eagle wrote:
link
Circulated by FCA about 30 days before all the "searching for a partner " by Marchione hit the press.
They have no money for the next gen of models ,proof of which is the announcement the all development is delayed until 2016.
That is bad news, and now 'we need a partner'.
Macaroni is whining about the cost's of Product Development is going up, but since he's taking over Chrysler Corp. he outsourced another engine (purchased the company VM Motori) and continues to outsource their transmissions (i.e. ZF and Asisin) and chose not to develop those product in house.
I'm seeing a lot of smoke and mirrors with this cat!
link
Circulated by FCA about 30 days before all the "searching for a partner " by Marchione hit the press.
They have no money for the next gen of models ,proof of which is the announcement the all development is delayed until 2016.
That is bad news, and now 'we need a partner'.- Not easy but yes apparently any large stockholder and it does not have to be a single individual .
Bankers don't care about fan bois or even own a car ,a payday is a payday
Have a look over at GMI for fairly rational discussion
myself ? I will believe it went I see it. hone eagle wrote:
mich800 wrote:
hone eagle wrote:
This has gone off track a bit , quality is not a factor here in fact the difference between best and last is minute.
This will boil down to a NY bankers payday,if a big check is in there it will happen. The fact that it maybe a bad marriage and will fall apart in 10 years does not matter, the bankers will be long gone on to the next 'deal'.
I hope you do not truly believe that. There may or may not be a merger or joint venture. But it is solely the decision of company management, the boards, and shareholders. The investment bank firms I am sure would love to make the M&A fees but they are NOT going to "convince" two different companies against their wills to do a deal. That is like blaming all of Chrysler's woos on the different failed buyouts, mergers, etc. At some point management needs to put on their big boy pants and take responsibility. Don't get me wrong, I hope and feel Chrysler will succeed. I am just getting tired of the blame everyone else but themselves for their financial issues.
GM discussion boards are convinced a hostile take over is possible ,the board or CEO have absolutely no say.
A majority shareholder (say 20%) is all it takes ,and no cash is involved -stock is swapped - the bankers take home a big commission and its done.
Do you really think it is that easy? So you think some large shareholder from FCA is going to swap with some large sharholder of GM to get a large voting share? Someone still needs to own those shares and that costs money. Or are you saying there is a, as you say a 20% owner already in place at GM that is ready to merge?
