Analyst: Fiat-Chrysler Alliance Sucks

by Edward Niedermeyer

June 12th, 2009 6:19 PM

Creative Global Investments analyst Sabine Blümel takes on the Fiat-Chrysler marriage at just-auto.com [sub] and she seems unable to find anything positive to say about the deal. “A three-way alliance, also including GM Europe, and even better, also GM Latin America, would have given [Fiat Group] a full-range product portfolio and an extended and strengthened geographic footprint,” says Blümel. Take GM’s Opel or Latin American ops out of the picture, and you’ve got a nasty case of the not-so-muches on your hands. “We see little potential strategic benefit for the Fiat and our concerns regarding the benefits for Fiat from the alliance have, if anything, increased since the alliance plan was first announced,” is the verdict.

“Fiat has the wrong model portfolio and expertise to succeed in the US. Fiat’s centre of gravity, both in expertise and market positioning is in the A- and B-segment, i.e., the ‘compact basic class’ that currently accounts for less than 4% in the US light vehicle market. Moreover, the alliance does not help Fiat address its own structural problems, including streamlining the production network, extending its geographic foot-print beyond Italy and the Latin markets and extending the product line-up above its mainstay of A-B-segment.”

Comments

Join the conversation

4 of 26 comments

Jeff Puthuff on Jun 13, 2009

I just had a look at Karesh's reliability database, and to me it looks like CR is not that far off in their reporting. If you have access to TrueDelta, look at the Town & Country: it goes from bad to worse. From 2006 to 2008 model years, trips per year per 100 went from 70 to 77 to 89. They're going the wrong way! This doesn't bode well for them re: the 2009 TTAC TWA award list.

Like Reply
U mad scientist on Jun 13, 2009
I didn’t vote for him, because he promised to do things that I didn’t want.. Now he is doing those things and I still don’t want them. So I’m going to bitch, moan, complain until he either does things MY way or someone takes over who does. Unfortunately, "MY way" is essentially what an obstructionist party tell them for most people. There really is no compromise for people like that, so I don't know why the current admin even bothers at times. Fiat might work out perfectly, tho odds are against it, but the given the circumstances it was decided to be the least worst decision, so how it can interpreted as the end of the world is quite interesting. And by interesting I mean pretty idiotic way of looking at a cost analysis you disagree with but lack convincing arguments against.

Like Reply
Lw on Jun 13, 2009

ihatetrees: I smell a Carter as well... So maybe the next prez is Reagan like... agenthex: "Unfortunately, “MY way” is essentially what an obstructionist party tell them for most people. There really is no compromise for people like that, so I don’t know why the current admin even bothers at times." Not sure I even understand this comment... Most liberals that I know vote/think about issues. Most conservatives (not I didn't say Republicans) that I know vote/think based on principles. I vote/live based on a few principles. I don't worry about issues.

Like Reply
U mad scientist on Jun 14, 2009
Most liberals that I know vote/think about issues. Most conservatives (not I didn’t say Republicans) that I know vote/think based on principles. I vote/live based on a few principles. I don’t worry about issues. Avoiding depth and understanding is how the powerful manipulate the little people. The world we live in works on causation, not abstractions of the human mind. Why do we fight a battle? Not because we need to protect the lord's castle and he can't afford mercenaries, but we're one people acting for liberty and freedom for all, right? Don't ever expect to be told anything but "principles" when it's your mind they're after.

Like Reply