Anyone who follows the auto industry with any regularity will know that comparing Toyota and Chrysler by any measure is laughable. For mainstream media types, who flit from frenzy to frenzy, all the negative press about Toyota might have left some believing that it’s the worst-off automaker in America. Luckily CNN Money is on-hand to set the record straight, with a piece titled “Forget Toyota. Chrysler’s got the most problems.” It’s a standard litany of TTACian criticism: declining sales, fleet and incentive dependence, no new product, flatlining consideration, and general suckitude. All of which helps make a solid month of media frenzy over sticky accelerators look kind of silly, especially considering that Chrysler’s stunning underperformance comes courtesy of the American and Canadian taxpayers.
Hey…the Calibers have new interiors.
if the powertrain is still so rough with the mpg as crap as with the Caliber i rented in south carolina in 2008, then the interior is not going to make a big difference (perhaps it will keep former customers in the fold, and perhaps that is all Marchione is expecting.)
As far as the comparison betw TMC and the CG, the fascination with TMC is due to the difference between TMC’s reputation and its current problems …
The reason Chrysler is skimming under the MSM media is because the story is boring, no tension, no death, no drama (yet), because Chrysler is performing (down to) expectations, and until its existance is threatened again, there is no story with legs.
Re: “stunning underperformance comes courtesy of the American and Canadian taxpayers.”
I guess I would re-phrase this to be “at the expense of the American and Canadian taxpayers,” although I know that’s implied. ;-)
I KNOW I would rephrase it to “this stunning under-performance comes at the expense of American and Canadien taxpayers, AGAINST THEIR WILL, not to mention their better judgment.”
+2. If I’d been told I was required to invest in an automaker, it would not have been Chrysler (or GM.)
How many Sebrings, Avengers, Calibers, Compasses, etc. would Chrysler need to sell just to cover operating costs of just building those unloved models? Assume that they fired everyone involved in new product development and these old products can be built and sold at a small profit, but Chrysler still needs to come up with cash to pay for parts, wages, and utility bills. There has to be some sales level below which it’s cheaper to end production than to use precious cash to run the factory. I suspect that several Chrysler models sell in such low volumes that they would be better off if they just quit building them.
And worse, the highest rated product they build (RAM truck) is not selling. This is a disaster for them because it is their highest profit product.
Management must be loosing sleep, wondering if the soon to be launched, high priced Grand Cherokee will sell in any real volume. If not…well
Right on the money. There is NO crossover between Chrysler Corp and Toyota. They are completely different buyers. You don’t see someone trying to decide between a Camry or Sebring if they have any money. Between a Jeep Wrangler or whatever Toyo has. A Ram truck or whatever Toyo has. Between a Prius or whatever Chrysler has. Won’t happen glad to say. It’s not whether Chrysler or Toyota loses. It is the consumer who is the loser.
I don’t know, I know more than a few folks who used to drive Jeep products that now have 4-Runners and FJ’s. I expect RAM full-size pickup trucks outsell Tundra’s, but I can easily imagine folks cross-shopping those. And I see way way more Taco’s than Dakota’s, even here in what should be American-car company heartland. What was it somebody said the other day, if it doesn’t say Hemi, Wrangler or Cummins on it, just walk away?
The Author of the Lemon-Aid books here in Canada has stated at a Public gathering that Chrysler will sell off Jeep and the Mini Vans to someone else? and the rest of the Company will cease to exist, what about FIAT?
What is this “FIAT” you speak of?
Nobody named “FIAT” has put so much as one dollar into Chrysler.
There have been a few eye-tal-yan sightings here in Detroit, none wielding a checkbook, however.
Great, another expert giving his opinion to sell books.
The new Challenger is the only reason they’re not already gone.
The MSM is a joke. Who actually gives a crap about what they say anymore? The complete lack of credibility of most msm outlets is laughable. TTAC should be careful it doesn’t fall into the same trap of pandering to its lowest denominator: the uninformed, unlettered, underachieving people who believe the media tells them the truth. I predict that Chrysler will survive and prosper despite all the informed? opinions of the writers on this site. Get back to me in five years: I’ll have the crow pie ready for you all.
Fast forward 12-18 months from now…
Jeep, with 3 models, will find a home as a niche player attached to different major brands across the U.S., gifted with the best Chryco could offer in terms of a physical plant. The rest of the corporation will have been sold off.
The nagging question is whether the Chryco executives will admit it’s over and pull the plug while there is still money left to spring Jeep in relatively good shape or will they take it so far into the ground that even Jeep will not escape.
Nissan has no money to by the Ram, the logical buyer, and nothing else Chrysler has is worth dragging into a corporation unless just to liquidate it. The 300 is ready for a $$$$$ update and the Challenger would be a good fit for who??? The minivans are beyond saving. The CUV market is heating up nicely but the Pacifica didn’t make it and Chryco has shown no indication they have learned anything about how to be a player there.
The “Studebaker syndrome” is RAMpant within Chrysler’s bloodstream and it is incurable.
The biggest buyer of Studebakers in 1962-1963 were fleets (including the US government), retail buyers had already been scared away by the fear that they would be left with an orphan brand and no resale value.
It became a self-fulfilling prophesy.
This is where Chry-Slur is at now.
And JEEP is a curse.
It murders it’s host.
First American Bantam.
Then Willys, which failed to the point of being bought by Kaiser.
Then American Motors.
Then Chrysler.
Then Chrysler dying under Daimler kontrol.
Then Cerberus.
Now under Fiat.
Any prospective car companies should avoid the Jeep brand like the plague.
Though I wouldn’t mind seeing the ChiCom government buying Jeep….
heh heh.
Actually, you’re looking at the situation in reverse: Jeep has been a strong enough brand over the decades to survive being saddled with weaker companies. Willys got the rights to Jeep after the War due to their being the main production plant (and Ford wasn’t all that interested – they had their own problems at the time). Kaiser and AMC both bought Jeep to strengthen their own weak product lines.
Chrysler bought AMC simply to get Jeep. While the Dodge truck line was doing OK at that time, they got a lot of 4wd credibility by buying the Jeep line.
I fully expect Jeep to survive the Fiat-Chrysler mess and continue on as a smaller but still profitable dedicated off-road manufacturer. There’s still a lot of off-road junkies out there.
Once again, with feeling – the bailouts were NOT about keeping Chrysler and GM viable, they were about buying time for rank and file to finish accumulating their 30 and outs, grab some silverware on the way out, and demand 100 cents on the dollar on their pensions. Product offerings? Minimum volume to cover costs? What’s that all about?
The bailouts were about keeping US economy from completely tanking. If GM and Chrysler weren’t such a big part of it the government would have never bailed them out. It is really that simple. I can’t speak for Chrysler but even if GM hadn’t been bailed out they still would be around. Someone would have bought them, restructured, and went back to business. Actually that would have been the better scenario as I suspect the corporate culture at GM is no different than it was before the bailout. And that is what needs to change for them to be succesful in the future.
Incorrect – the ‘save the economy’ mission could have been done with a quick bankruptcy. SUch a path would have voided the master agreements. Existing Bondholder laws would have been upheld.
No, the true message of the governemnt’s intervention was “You don’t have to face the music.”
@Carlson fan
Eric or Satch?
The way I hear it, she was pretty high-mileage for a 17 year old, and that she’d been driven pretty hard before Satch took her for a ride.
Re the Man who said that the “Lemon-Aid” author was only interested in selling books, not so, they are only a Guide for everyone, and are in Public Library’s though out Canada, he does know what he writes about over Thirty years, Even Consumer Reports does not like or recommend Chrysler products, this is one Company that will soon be long gone and it should never have been saved by the current USA Government!
I’ve said it once, and I’ll say it again: Despite predictions of disaster from those in the “rust belt,” GM’s and Chrysler’s bankruptcies should have followed the United States Bankruptcy Code to the letter.
Probably would have ended up being Chapter 11 for GM, and chapter 7 for Chrysler. It would have been less costly, faster and probably would have preserved/created more jobs in the long run.
The major clue was when I realized that the Federal bailout costs were close to or exceeded those of the venture capital required to start a new car company of similar size.
The times when Chrysler has been a story in recent decades have been the times when they DIDN’T suck. Toyota being dominant and Chrysler being lousy is the status quo, dog bites man, just another day in the auto biz. Flip either of those and you’ve got a story.
At least the Sebring is safe.
Because no one drives them.
I think most modern cars are pretty safe, but the last stats I saw showed that the Sebring had one of the highest fatality rates per miles driven among midsize cars. Worse than a Camry or a Passat.
One of the former “Big 3” needs to die. It’s really as simple as that.
The market has dictated the need for at most two US domestic-branded automakers, and I really don’t think we need that many. Like it or not, the market is moving East and the Detroit relics are a dying breed.
I’d prefer Gov’t Motors be the one to bite the dust, but Chrysler is by far the weakest US automaker. I can’t see Fiat doing much for the brand in the long run — look at their halfhearted efforts to date, Lancias with different grilles and that awful “5th Avenue” microvan. They’re not even trying.
At least the feds didn’t blow as much of our money bailing it out as they did GM.
I understand that the “bailouts” are really loans that are being repaid.
Well, to do that (neither has started doing so yet) the companies need to make money. They make money by selling vehicles people want to buy, at a profit. They’re not doing that either (see the return of incentives and rebates) and won’t until they offer truly desirable products at a fair price.
Remember, GM and Chrysler were companies the marketplace had already dictated should fail. For the past five years, the only way most bread-and-butter GMs and Chryslers could sell was to put a mountain of cash on the hood. Yes, there are exceptions… but overall, neither automaker has what one could describe as a desirable product line.
I believe the money’s already gone. We’ll never see it. I believe both companies should (and will) fail, and the lesson serve as an expensive example for years to come about why the government should never, ever interfere with market forces.
Toyota and others knew they were having issues and attempted to hide it. All Car Companies should have came forward with a full disclosures of what car were dangerous. Instead of waiting for a huge media blitz and tons of public pressure. I never seen so many car companies GM – NISSAN – TOYOTA – HYUNDAI having recalls all at the same time. I had no idea my car was affected until I looked on http://www.carpedalrecall.com and found I had a bad Anti Lock control unit on my 2008 Pontiac G8 , my co workers Ford Truck had a recall also. So be careful
If they don’t kill off everything but the Wrangler, Grand Cherokee, 300 and maybe some small pos, then they’re dead car co. walking anyway.
They should make a wrangler truck
lectrobyte: actually the Sebring has a 5 star safety rating, better than Camry or Passat. if you’re going to statements like that, have some evidence to back your claims; ie where did you read it , link to an article or the next door neighbor who fed you that line of crap. Just because the Sebring is not a popular vehicle does not make it a bad one. State some facts, not your feelings.