By on September 6, 2015

Sergio Marchionne - FCA

Speaking at the Formula One Italian Grand Prix this weekend, Fiat Chrysler Automobiles CEO Sergio Marchionne told Reuters that a merger with General Motors was at the top of his list.

“That discussion remains a high priority for FCA,” Marchionne told Reuters. “We consider it to be the best possible strategic alternative for us and for them. General Motors does remain the ideal partner for us and we represent a not easily replaceable alternative for them.”

(Emphasis mine. But what are the other “strategic alternatives?”)

Marchionne stopped short of saying that he’d pursue a hostile takeover bid for GM, although he already said there were various forms of “hugs” that he’d have for the automaker to convince them.

“There are varying degrees of hugs. I can hug you nicely, I can hug you tightly, I can hug you like a bear, I can really hug you. Everything starts with physical contact. Then it can degrade, but it starts with physical contact,” he told Automotive News last month.

GM has said it has no interest in a “bail out” of FCA.

Marchionne was spotted in the garage at Ferrari during the race. Next month, Ferrari will spin off from FCA to help raise cash for the debt-saddled automaker. Marchionne said he believes that Ferrari could be worth $11 billion.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

Recommended

78 Comments on “Sergio Marchionne Hasn’t Forgotten About GM, You Guys...”


  • avatar
    Nicholas Weaver

    As GM still hasn’t forgotten the $2B or so they paid to avoid having to merge with FIAT a few years ago…

    • 0 avatar
      dwford

      Exactly. What is so different with Fiat now that makes a merger make sense, when it didn’t just a few years ago?

      • 0 avatar
        Lorenzo

        Well, for one thing that earlier tie-in was a decade ago, before Fiat was gifted Chrysler. FCA now has Jeep, but GM doesn’t need Ram, Chrysler/Dodge, Alfa, the mess of European Fiat, or the coming mess of Brazilian Fiat.

        FCA’s prospects in 2 of its 3 main zones – Europe and Brazil – are not good, and a downturn in the US would sink FCA. That’s why Sergio is so relentless in seeking a partner/savior.

        The parties that could help can probably get the pieces they want more cheaply from bankruptcy: GM the vans, Ford gets Jeep, and Toyota or Nissan get Ram. Chrysler and Fiat finally die, with stock and bond holders taking a bath.

        Nobody wants the accumulated debt estimated by one banker at $30+ Billion, though listed at $8 billion NET, since Sergio is sitting on over $20 billion in internal accounts to make the debt look smaller. Sergio is a drowning man looking for a strong swimmer to grab.

      • 0 avatar
        RobertRyan

        Marchionne, expects to get several billion for the sale of Ferrari in 2016. He has worked himself up into a lather, about it, he is more than hinting at a hostile takeover

        • 0 avatar
          Lorenzo

          GM over the last three years has had $46 billion in combined gross profits. While their gross revenue may seem similar (FCA=$109 billion, GM=$156 billion), GM is a much larger company with a lot more financial resources. FCA made $4.2 billion in gross profit for 2014, GM had approximately that much gross profit each of the last four quarters. Sergio doesn’t have the resources for a hostile takeover, unless the Agnelli family holding company goes for broke, a highly unlikely prospect.

        • 0 avatar
          RobertRyan

          Ferrari and Maserati will not be sold at a ” loss” , that is what he expects. They will be snapped up,by another manufacturer or Corporate entity

      • 0 avatar
        APaGttH

        A lot is different and what is different makes a merger look even illogical and ill-conceived than before.

    • 0 avatar

      May be Sergio just wants to repeat his stunt hoping but this time GM will not get off hook for mere 2 billions. First time it was like tragedy but this time it is a farce.

  • avatar
    Rday

    Sergio is one of the great con mans of the century. but GM is probably so corrupted/incompetent that I am sure if he greased the right palms he can pull off another ripoff of the american taxpayer.

  • avatar
    wmba

    He ripped off VEBA, maybe, the UAW healthcare portion doled out at bankruptcy and paid off all the government loans by 2011, including the Canadian ones. But why bother with the truth, or complain about the funds that didn’t get paid back because they were handed out PRIOR to bankruptcy, and not Marchionne’s problem, but Cerberus’. And who’s gone after those latter incompetents? Not a soul – they’re ‘Murican after all and immune from criticism.

    Americans love revisionism if it appeals to some perverted vision of reality and patriotism.

    As for Marchionne himself, I hope he rings all the bells over at GM and makes their lives a living hell. Why not, it’ll be fun reading all the squawks and boos here.

    As for the post author, who frequently seems asleep at the switch, FCA is selling off 10% of Ferrari in the IPO, not the whole thing. Unless of course, Marchionne changes his mind a second time on the percentage of sell-off.

    • 0 avatar
      highdesertcat

      “I hope he rings all the bells over at GM and makes their lives a living hell. ”

      Although I wholeheartedly agree with your view, I do not believe for a New York Minute that this merger will ever come to pass.

      The UAW will petition and lobby the US Congress to keep this merger from happening. It would the UAW’s worst nightmare to realize this merger. The UAW was marginalized by Sergio at FCA and the UAW does not ever want to be publicly embarrassed like that again.

      I also have to add I think this merger would go a long way to help consolidation in the global automotive market place. There really is only ONE US automaker, and that is Ford.

      On the planet there really are only Toyota, VW, and Ford that can hold their own. The others are just niche players with select clientele to include Mercedes, BMW, Honda, Nissan et al.

      • 0 avatar
        RobertRyan

        @highdesertcat
        Sergio wants FCA/GM to one of the big players

        • 0 avatar
          highdesertcat

          RobertRyan, I know he does. I don’t know if that will ever happen, but I do not envy Sergio his dream.

          In fact, I like the guy. I like his business style. I like his industry bravado. I like his global machismo. I like what he has done with and for defunct Chrysler.

          Although I am in favor of consolidation in the global auto industry, I don’t know how merging with GM will make either company better. Schit is schit. You cannot make schit palatable.

          Unless…., this is just a strategy of the M&A of two dead companies, and achieving the synergy of making something better out of three lousy companies.

          GM and Chrysler both died, and it would have been better if they had stayed dead.

          But if Sergio does somehow succeed in merging with GM, he will, in fact, have indirectly been the recipient of >$11B of US taxpayer money; $10B which GM absconded with and never repaid, and $1B of bribe money the US gov’t paid Sergio to dispose of Chrysler’s carcass in 2009.

          So I say, “Good on him!”

      • 0 avatar

        How is Ford any more American than GM?

        • 0 avatar
          derekson

          “How is Ford any more American than GM?”

          Presumably it’s because their small cars are designed in Europe by white people instead of in Korea by yellow people. That’s the biggest difference I can see.

          • 0 avatar
            RideHeight

            “designed in Europe by white people instead of in Korea by yellow people.”

            Silly rabbit, “yellow people” ARE the new white people.

            Who do you think buys all the Bösendorfers and Bechsteins today? Because their kids can actually make use of them.

          • 0 avatar
            Zykotec

            I believe quite a lot of GM cars are designed and engineered in Europe too, so the difference is even smaller than people would think.

      • 0 avatar
        derekson

        In what world is Ford a global company that can hold its own but GM is a niche player?

        • 0 avatar
          JohnTaurus_3.0_AX4N

          in a world where Ford’s “smarter, not neccesarily larger” position leaves it better able to deal with changes and make a better product. It pays off in the long run with a more healthy company that can better weather storms. Ford products as a whole are better than GM’s, both here and globally. FCA is even better in some areas than GM. Ford is also the best selling brand in the US. GM as a whole sells more cars, but I think you get the idea.

          GM was weakened by its bankruptcy, mostly in preception among its demographics. It still has liabilities in how much it has to do, funding for several divisions that have yet to mark a return on their substantial investments. This contributes to its hit-and-miss product line.

          Ford, by contrast, is a lean money making machine after they dropped off everything but themselves and Lincoln. They have since concentrated on their core products (F-Series and vans, Fusion/Mondeo with decent small cars and crossovers). Globaly, the T6 Ranger holds its own, as do Fiesta and Focus. Transit sells very well globally. It is now the US’s best selling fullsize van, so far advanced from GM’s compeditors, its like a Model TT truck compared to a donkey and a cart.

          Now theyre turning their attention to Lincoln as they rebuild it and turn it in to a global luxury brand. Latest MKZ and MKC were the start, Continental and an all-new aluminum Navigator are the next steps. I believe both will do well here and in China.

          In other words, Ford needs a partnership about as much as it needs a new Pinto. They need help from no one. GM, on the other hand, could use help in some areas and makes a more likely partner to someone with product gaps and no real mainstream (full-line) global brands.

  • avatar
    thelaine

    Creepy stalker.

  • avatar

    If Chrysler merges with GM, it would be the end of Chrysler.

    JEEP, RAM and DODGE are valuable brands. The 200 and 300 alone aren’t enough to keep Chrysler afloat. They need “more”. what’s more look like? I have no idea.

    Perhaps if they bring back the Pacifica using the new powertrain technology and make the interiors a little better. 4 Vehicles might be enough. the foreign markets love em from Dubai to Australia.

    • 0 avatar
      Mandalorian

      Chrysler DESPERATELY needs a cross-over or two. Soft-roaders though, don’t want to step on Jeep’s toes. Something like a Traverse with the 3.6 Pentastar in it.

      • 0 avatar
        Conslaw

        Chrysler doesn’t necessarily need more than the 200 and the 300, because in the same showroom there are Dodges, Jeeps and Fiats. As long as they have most niches covered between those brands they are alright.

      • 0 avatar
        nickoo

        As long as there’s Jeep, I don’t think Chrysler needs crossovers or SUVs. What Chrysler needs is to un-f the 200 with it’s too small backseat and inadequate backseat egress and headroom, to fix or drop the 9 speed ASAP, a compact car, and to move further upmarket to differentiate it from dodge.

        Chrysler basically needs the following models:
        100
        200
        300
        town and country

        As far as moving upmarket, part of that, which is missing is basic fit and finish and materials. ALL Chrysler products need better fit and finish, the 300 has nice materials going for it, but I sat in a town and country and the fit-up of the faux-wood insert was abhorrent, it would have been 100x better for Chrysler to simply have left it out in their design than do that poor of a fit-up job on the piece that is RIGHT IN FRONT OF YOUR FACE. Also, the rear and mid rear seats are not that good in their minivan.

        My sister and my friend both bought the kia minivan for their families, and it seems like a much better van than the town and country.

        • 0 avatar
          PentastarPride

          Chrysler needs: Concorde (bring back and modernize the LH, this time with RWD), LeBaron (the 200 should have been called this from the beginning), keep the 300 but create an upmarket version, the New Yorker.

          They also need to put all their might into Imperial and make it on par with the likes of the Mercedes S-Class.

          Then, of course, they will always need the Town and Country, but the Dodge Grand Caravan has gotta stay too. It’s as important to American automotive history as the Ford Mustang. Also, Dodge gets Ram back.

          • 0 avatar
            DweezilSFV

            No more Imperial, please. The name has been so abused over the decades and it’s best sales year was 1957. Sometimes one just has to let go.

        • 0 avatar
          derekson

          “and to move further upmarket to differentiate it from dodge.”

          They just finished moving Chrysler DOWNMARKET. They aren’t going to try and reposition it as luxury again now. Chrysler is supposed to be the main line manufacturer to compete with Ford/Chevy/Toyota/Honda/etc. That’s why Chrysler got the 200 and that’s why the T&C is surviving with the Grand Caravan dying off.

          FCA has luxury covered with Alfa/Maserati, they don’t need Chrysler pretending to be luxury too.

    • 0 avatar
      matador

      Dodge really doesn’t have value to GM. They would be better served to bring back Pontiac than to have another quasi-performance brand (For the most part). Chrysler is completely redundant to Buick, and that leaves Jeep and RAM.

      Jeep obviously has value and brand cachet, as does RAM. But, I don’t know if RAM would help GM. They already have a robust truck line, and could easily federalize the Movano to compete against the ProMaster and Transit.

      The problem with Chrysler as a brand is that they’ve over-cheapened themselves. Wasting time, I looked at some later model vehicles. The interior of the 200 is not impressive at all!

    • 0 avatar
      RobertRyan

      Chrysler has basically died in Australia, Jeep is now rapidly trying to join the exit from the Aussie market

  • avatar
    PrincipalDan

    GM + Fiat is a ridiculous mash up.

    End of Story.

  • avatar
    bobman

    Surely, this is the movie Rocky VI in the making.

    Round 8;
    Rocky (Sergio) is in the corner, near death, telling Micky “cut me….cut me”

    Round 10;
    Rocky (Sergio) yelling out Adrian!! (Mary) Adrian!!

    Ends with Sergio and Mary walking to the locker room hand in hand, skipping all the way.

    FCGM is born!! The world is much better now.

  • avatar
    canddmeyer

    So long as GM is affiliated with the government through military purchases it will never fail, and Marchionne is smart to want a piece of that pie.

  • avatar
    Truckducken

    How hard and fast will the dealer consolidation hit? And the brand rationalization? I mean, I like the idea, as long as Sergio is running the resulting behemoth, but holy hell the politics are going to be stacked against this. And I don’t see how it fixes Europe, which is broken beyond repair for both firms solo. Grabbing some popcorn…

  • avatar
    Jeff S

    A merger with GM would be disastrous for GM. FCA has nothing to offer GM except Jeep. Geely or Tata would be very interested in acquiring FCA with its dealer network throughout North America and Europe. If FCA and GM merged then Geely or Tata would be there to pick up the pieces for pennies on the dollar. Nissan-Renault would be a better fit for FCA and would become one of the top automakers in the World.

  • avatar
    Joss

    I believe both are vulnerable to the coming AI shake up. These are Corp founded in the machine age and both nearly drowned recently…

    • 0 avatar
      DeadWeight

      Bingo.

      And it’s hilarious to read so many comments stating or implying that GM is a) in better financial health than FCA, and/or b) somehow has better vehicle reliability/quality than FCA (minus the Fiat-Alfa portion).

      GM’s 4 remaining brands have barely crept up to middling in quality and reliability overall when weighted against the industry average on any credible survey, and in many important ways, Chrysler, RAM & Dodge products are more refined, reliable and just better assembled than GM garbage.

      Cadillac is in total disarray, with low gas prices helping aid brisk sales of the Escalade, which is nearly single-handedly saving Cadillac from a complete torrent of red ink to the point of serious discussion of shutting it down (bleeding from everywhere); Buick is a basket case suffering from an identity crisis, a poor product mix (with aging platforms), and rapidly decelerating sales, and Chevy isn’t exactly setting the world on fire. GMC is profitable and successful currently thanks in major part to low fuel prices.

      If anything, GM is a pickup truck sales downturn away from net profits turning into massive net losses,
      same as it’s been for the better part of 30 years at Guangdong Motors.

      • 0 avatar
        RobertRyan

        @Deadweight
        Your right, the Corporation is far from healthy and keeps sliding back in overall profitability

        • 0 avatar
          Dave M.

          But they won’t get a 2nd bite at bankruptcy. Wiping themselves clean of all obligations should make anyone profitable.

          I’m trying to think of one GM model that is class-leading. And I can’t.

          As a market traditionalist, I would hate to lose some storied brands and models. But if this merger goes through, at least 50% of the combined models are unneeded.

      • 0 avatar
        mfrank

        To me a GM Chrysler merger makes financial sense, but employees and customers will not be pleased with the result. I’m imagining Dodge/Ram versions of Chevrolet’s and Alfa Romeo and Maserati versions of Cadillac’s. It will be similar to what GM did to Saab, times a hundred. On the flip side, it will be great for The Truth About Cars when all the Jeep, Mopar, and Alfa fan boys melt down about the destruction of their brands. My popcorn is ready and I’m ready for the drama to begin.

  • avatar
    nickoo

    Ahh, the espresso swilling sweater strikes again. FCA and GM have way too much overlap to have one acquire the other. When are the share holders and the owner family going to force this man out?

    FCA is totally screwed in the next few years as they have the lowest fuel economy average and nothing on the market to address this issue. FCA would be better off doing a hostile take-over of Tesla than it would be of GM because that would ensure its survival, but Sergio is downright hostile towards electric cars. He is clueless, battery tech is moving so fast that it is nothing short of miraculous. We are basically in the Prodigy days of Internet right now with Battery-Electric cars, and just like those early days led to where we are today with connectivity, that’s where we will be in 10 years with Battery-Electric. Sergio has shown he has no idea how hard he is going to be blindsided in the next decade and it will be too late for them by then to try and catch up.

    Sergio is too involved in the brand management and his pet projects such as Alfa and Maseratti. He also makes engineering/cost type decisions when he has no business doing so (such as ensuring certain parts under the hood be powder coated because it looks pretty, even though they already have rust protection on them) and he doesn’t know how to play beloved US brands to the US Market.

    Instead of him wasting money on Fiat and Alfa for the USA, he should have been building better Chryslers and better Dodges, the two weak links. Dodge doesn’t even have a midsize car anymore or a subcompact, Chrysler STILL doesn’t have a compact, and they still don’t sell a single hybrid, I mean WTF is going on over there?

    • 0 avatar
      derekson

      Sergio is well aware that electrics and hybrids are necessary for the future; that’s a big part of why he is so desperate to find a partner with cash and R&D chops. FCA has no hybridization outside of the LaFerrari and the only electric car they’ve built was the electric Fiat 500e, for which they contracted all development out to Bosch.

      In addition to having no EV technology, FCA also lacks a modular engine family for turbocharged DI gas and diesels and they lack modern modular vehicle platforms for the development of new products. And they have no money to develop any of these 3 major things. As it is they’re siphoning money from Jeep and Ram to tweak old platforms to make new luxury cars, and sticking turbocharged versions of the Tigershark and Pentastar engines in them rather than modern DI motors like all their competitors.

      • 0 avatar
        Pch101

        “Sergio is well aware that electrics and hybrids are necessary for the future.”

        Except that he isn’t and they’re not. EVs are a money loser and hybrids are in a niche dominated by Toyota.

        As I keep noting, Marchionne wants global scale in general and European scale in particular. If this is 1940, then VAG is the Wehrmacht and Marchionne does not want Fiat to be France. I seriously doubt that he expects to get GM, and Mary Barra surely wouldn’t want such a thing as it would put her out of a job.

    • 0 avatar
      pragmatic

      Agree with you on what FCA is doing for Chrysler and Dodge. They are using them as a cash cow to fund dreams of Alfa and Maserati that will have a hard time paying off. They need some hybrids including plug-in hybrids. Europe has not recovered and when it does, Fiat does not seem to be what they will be looking for.

      That said I’m less optimistic on battery technology. Its not moving as fast as people think. Quick charging on a large scale is pretty illusionary if people expect both quick charging and low cost.

  • avatar
    Jeff S

    @nickoo–Agree with your above statements. FCA needs to concentrate on the quality of its products and not wasting anymore time and money on Alfa, Fiat, and the other Italian appendages. A merger with GM would only jeopardize GM’s future.

    • 0 avatar
      RobertRyan

      @Jeff S.
      Has the potential to sink both. Too many overlapping models. Which ones get the cut? He would need to put FCA in a considerable amount of debt to pull it off. Very risky move

  • avatar
    praeliber

    He really wants it…

    He’ll call it American Motor Co. and their slogan will be “imported from the heartbeat of America”

  • avatar
    HotPotato

    Ironic that Sergio is anti-EV, given that the Fiat 500e is the most delightful EV on the market. Maybe he should build on that!

    There’s a huge wave of johnny-come-lately EVs coming to market now, such as the critically acclaimed VW e-Golf, and the 500e needs DC quick charging and touch-screen infotainment to stay competitive.

    Luckily, the car was ALREADY developed to be DCQC capable, they just need to update the software and add the connector. It’s absurd that they didn’t do this in the first place, but then the software in general was delivered unfinished, with flaws that range from inconvenient to dangerous, so I suppose it shouldn’t surprise me.

    • 0 avatar
      Steve65

      The Tesla(s), the Leaf, the i3, and to some extent the Bolt are serious attempts to establish a market, gain market share, and generate profits (eventually).

      The others are compliance cars,* and exist solely because regulations in markets where their makers wish to play demand them. They build as few as they are allowed, and sell them at the best price they can manage to minimize the losses.

      *or in the case of the i8, bragging rights halo cars.

  • avatar
    motormouth

    …And partnerships, JVs, etc. involving GM have historically gone so well.

    This idea is so absurd that it almost seems like Marchionne is doing a ‘look over here’ act, while he does something else over there.

  • avatar
    DownEaster

    Still wish that Chrysler was able to remain independent and American after bankruptcy. Sergio is either looking for a “cash out” from the merger and will retire or is afraid Chrysler will tank if gas rises quickly and truck /SUV sales fall. They need the SUV and trucks for profits. Sergio has done a lot to bring Chrysler back but it carries a high level of debt and a not so good reputation for quality.

  • avatar
    vent-L-8

    anyone else notice how the loss leading italian brands always get top billing at fiat these days?

  • avatar
    Zykotec

    For more than 100 years, GM has bought and run a bunch of American and foreign carmakers, if they were to merge with Chrysler, Ford would be the only ‘Independent’ (a bit of a stretch, but at least partly family owned , and selling mostly under one brand name) left in the US.
    Like most others I can not see how a merger between GM and FCA would not be the end of several brands, except for purely rebadged models.

  • avatar
    STRATOS

    Sergio desperately wants to be part of the wall street banksters club.He believes it easy to replicate Tesla like con jobs.

    • 0 avatar
      highdesertcat

      I think he also knows that the US gov’t will never let GM fail and that if needed it will bail out GM again and again.

      There is something to be said for having the full faith and credit of these United States in your back pocket, like GM does now.

      And if Sergio succeeds in merging with GM (although I don’t think the US gov’t will allow it), Sergio will never have to worry about corporate funding again.

      Smart! Very smart!

  • avatar

    Sergio sees the future of carmaking modeled after Wintel. What he sees/expects and wants is one company (German) that designs chassis, another – engines/motors/batteries , electrical (Panasonic) but not making cars. Car making companies do not engineer cars – they just come up with specs, design exterior and interior and slap the badge just like laptops are made today – they all designed and made in Taiwan with different badges. To any Wintel there always will be one Apple though (think Tesla). But thats about all. As an example Dell does not design laptops – they have the group of architects who come up with specs and features and the actual design and manufacturing is outsourced to Chinese or Taiwanese contractor (Asus e.g.).

  • avatar
    Tstag

    In many respects I would have thought a merger between Nissan Renault and FCA would have made the most sense. They’d be little overlap and pleny of combined strength in place like Europe where alone they lack strength.

    Persuading Renault Nissan on the other hand may be tough

    • 0 avatar
      derekson

      I think PSA or maybe Hyundai make the most sense really. Renault and Nissan have most markets and niches covered with their JV, plus they have tie-ins with Mercedes now. PSA on the other hand has absolutely 0 North American footprint and is strong in China where FCA is weak. And together the two companies would have solid European marketshare (plus FCA would gain mainstream brands in Europe and Asia that they currently lack). I’m not sure where PSA stands on platforms and engine families at this point though.

  • avatar
    dirtyblueshirt

    Am I the only one who noticed that they’re using the old Dodge logo still?

  • avatar
    Lynn E.

    What is the story with Jeep? No one has mentioned that Jeep kills every company that takes it on. Jeep is selling well now but does making it require non-compatible parts and special assembly lines so even if it sells well there is extra expense in putting up with it? Would FCA be better off if they gave Jeep away? Maybe we could use it as a weapon to destroy the Chinese auto industry.

    • 0 avatar
      28-Cars-Later

      I’ve heard that before about Jeep and it seems to be true based on history, however Jeep seems to be the crown jewel of FCA at the moment. Without it what have you really got? A truck division ok, but then there is Chrysler and Dodge which are not the strongest brands on their own. Then you’ve got Fiat and its Italian brands which I am no so sure how strong they are on their own.

      • 0 avatar
        RobertRyan

        @28-Days-Later,
        ” Truck Division” RAM only exists in North America. His real Truck Division, that covers, light commercials, MDT’s/ HDT’s IVECO along with CNH, i.e. Case is a real money maker. So are Ferrari and Maseratti. Italian and North American cars, with the exception of Jeep are not making money.

        • 0 avatar
          DenverMike

          Ferrari and Maserati are losers. They should be culled, and can no way stand alone. That’s why they’re owned by Fiat.

          Ram pickups are only a North American thing, but are still the 3rd most profitable “cars” in the world. Ram pickups are best ‘line’ of cars Sergio has going for him and Fiat. Except for the Cherokee, nothing else FCA related even comes close.

          If he could, he would do best by killing all else *except* for the Cherokee, Wrangler, Challenger, Charger, Grand Caravan and 300. That’s from the Chrysler end. Ferrari and Maserati would be next on the chopping block.

          • 0 avatar
            RobertRyan

            Ferrari and Maserati make a fair bit of profit for Fiat,but he would need to sell them to raise the 3-4 Billion he needs to help do a hostile takeover of GM. They are separate from Fiat anyway.They are prized assets, that do a fair bit of Automotive research as well as produce Sportscars and race cars
            RAM and a Jeep are Chryslers profit centre , without them it would not survive. The others are quite profitable,IVECO/ CNH , but Fiat cars are not, they have consistently let the side down

          • 0 avatar
            DenverMike

            Maserati and Ferrari are exactly that. Prized possessions. So it doesn’t matter if they sell at a loss. Or in other words, “halo cars”. The same way the Viper, Ford GT and Corvette are probably all losers when it comes to direct profitability. This is all fine when over all OEM (group) profits are good. Otherwise they have to die.

    • 0 avatar
      JustPassinThru

      Jeep…is a a siren. It has seduced bigger carmakers since its inception – killing first American Bantam; then, slowly killing Willys. Then the Kaiser conglomerate took over Willys; folding Kaiser-Frazer into it.

      They would have made it but for the coming safety laws in 1966.

      They sold it to AMC…actually, engineered a sale since Kaiser owned a big chunk of AMC at the time. Probably Henry’s dream to take over AMC; but Henry Kaiser died in 1967. The family wanted only to liquidate; all of the Kaiser industries went away.

      AMC…was at a crossroads; and while Jeep was a good purchase, they went down a dead end with the new Matador and Pacer. That sealed their fate.

      In comes Chrysler; and through no flaw of the company itself, it finds itself put in play and finally raped by Daimler. The end result was a Chrysler that was less viable than AMC was.

      Now it’s FCA’s turn. Once again, players and operators have gotten control. None of this is the fault of Jeep, the product…but it seems to hang over the marque like a cloud.

      Give it to the Chinese? I’d hate to see that…but maybe it’s the only way…

      • 0 avatar
        Steve65

        More like Jeep keeps getting grabbed by dying companies hoping to be rescued, but proves insufficient to single-handedly save them.

        • 0 avatar
          JustPassinThru

          Not really. There was no such thing as a “bailout” in the 1950s when Henry Kaiser’s company bought Willys-Overland. Nor was there any talk of hitting the public treasury when AMC was persuaded/pushed into buying Kaiser-Jeep.

          The Renault purchase of AMC-Jeep got no government support – in fact it lost favor and Renault was told to sell government-contractor AMGeneral.

          The Chrysler purchase happened a few years after Lido made a big show of paying off the loan guarantees. No government money there, either.

          ONLY FCA got governmnet HELP in buying up American industries. Thank Sergio, who plays the crony game well.

  • avatar
    DweezilSFV

    New company name: F-GM. I kind of like that.

  • avatar
    and003

    With all due respect to Marchionne and what he’s done with Chrysler, it’s just as well that GM refused his idea. I’m not a fan of the idea of an FCA merger with GM because of a little thing called vehicle overlap.

    FCA US LLC has vehicles that compete with similar vehicles at GM, and I fear that if a merger were to take place, production of vehicles like the Challenger, RAM and Viper would cease, and I’m not looking forward to that.


Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • healthy skeptic: @hreardon >> Part of the reason for the shenanigans is because of limited supply. A good...
  • Scoutdude: The C in CAFE stands for Corporate, so the Jeep brand not meeting its target can be offset by selling...
  • namesakeone: I get the impression that, were there direct manufacturer-to-customer sales, the manufacturer would...
  • GiddyHitch: Matt and the commenters seem to be focused on Multimatic and the assembly process as the root cause of...
  • Robbie: Middlemen cost money. If removed, these cost will be divided over customer and producer. To presume that 100%...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff