By on August 3, 2010

Set the way-back machine to our July 2009 Chrysler Group sales post, and a certain amount of deja-vu might just set in. Last Summer, Chrysler’s version of success was a mere single-digit percentage volume decline. This July, Chrysler’s big accomplishment was a five percent improvement over last July’s number. Last July we thought the Chrysler brand in particular was “toast,” and based on this July’s numbers, we can’t say we’ve found much to change that opinion, as ChryCo’s eponymous brand dropped 11 percent year-over-year, and shed over 3k units of volume compared to June. Chrysler Town & Country outsold the rest of the brand alone at 8,083 units, an 18 percent gain.

Meanwhile, ChryCo’s other “volume brand” Dodge literally sold one more car than it did in last year’s Cash-for-Clunker-fueled July. Yes, Jeep and Ram are growing compared to last month and last July, but together they combine for fewer than 50k units. And all told, Chrysler Group once again combined for fewer than 95k units, selling only 93,313. If you average Chrysler’s 620,532 year-to-date sales over the last seven months, you find that the bailed-out automaker is running about 6,500 units per month behind the volume number that its CEO gave as a “survival number.” CEO Sergio Marchionne may have “never missed a target” but right now he’s on track to come up a solid 37k units short of his 1.1m 2010 sales goal (non-seasonally-adjusted). Considering the razor-thing margin for that 2010 volume target, Chrysler’s turnaround plan needs a turnaround plan. Fast.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

17 Comments on “Chrysler July Sales Rise Five Percent, Remain Below 95k “Survival Volume”...”

  • avatar

    Look how well Jeep has done with interest sparked from the new Grand Cherokee. Chrysler and Dodge have lame duck products soon due for extensive revision. 300 and Charger are next up to bat. Major revisions to the rest of the line (Sebring, Avenger). Sorry, but I really don’t think a 37,000 unit shortfall of 950,000 is going to break the bank

  • avatar

    The organization of the chart is somewhat confusing. For some reason my mind wants to read it as chronological…

  • avatar

    I agree, mjz. 37k units short for a full year is not much to worry about. 137k would be a different story. What got them below target was the month of january, when they only sold 57k units. If it wasn’t for that they would be right on target.

  • avatar

    I was looking at the chart at the top again and realized something. The dodge division would have been up 21k units if they hadn’t separated the trucks.

  • avatar

    Well, if they cant survive on less than 95K units per month, then explain how they are still alive?

    Can we please stop beating on this “95K” thing month after month already? Maybe their cost structure has changed for the better since Sergio made that proclaimation…perhaps their profit per unit is higher than he expected at that time…the list goes on.

    Instead of reporting doom and gloom, how about emphasizing the positives associated with Chrysler being up in spite of stale product while several TTAC darling brands are down? Look at the bright side – if this keeps up, the taxpayers may get their money back from Chrysler after all!

  • avatar

    That’s a pretty absurd perspective. The Chrysler brand only has 3 actual models (Sebring, 300, T&C). Those 3 models were at-or-better than last year. 2 of those are due for a substantial overhaul in less than 6 months. The 3rd has an overhaul coming-soonish.

    As for the rest…you can see the effects of the C4C July 2009. Where were the huge drops in this year’s sales? Patriot. Compass. Caliber. Avenger.

    Now, the 95K would be nice…survival number, and all that. However, this month’s numbers, and last month’s numbers, look pretty good to me. I’d imagine they look pretty good to the folks working there.

    As with any article here that contains the word Chrysler (when not being used as a punchline or a verb): All it took was a spin on the Wheel Of Negativity ™ to turn lemonade into lemons.

  • avatar

    I’ve never really paid any attention to minivan sales numbers, but is it normal for the T&C to outsell the Caravan? The ’09 numbers would suggest no, but two data points don’t really show a trend.

  • avatar

    Once the new Jeep gets in full swing…it will be unstoppable. No other 5 seat CUV/SUV can touch the thing for refinement, capability, etc.

  • avatar

    The “upgrades” that are coming to the mini-van, and Sebring should help a little with the numbers on the Chrysler side and when the new 300 arrives at the begining of next year then Chrysler will look relevant again.
    I’m sure that as the Grand Cherokee ramps up and the dealers get some inventory that we’ll see some good numbers for the Jeep brand.
    Lots of new or upgraded product coming, it will only get better for long suffering Mopar fans, now that they are truly free from the oppressive, arrogant ownership that drove them into the ground for almost ten years.
    I doubt that coming in 37k short on the year is going to break Sergio’s reputation.

  • avatar

    I thought they axed the Commander? And the T&C is outselling the Caravan? While they might have a hit with the new Grand Cherokee, it is going up against a new and well refined Explorer. Doubt it will be a saviour. I’m with TTAC, ChryCo has a long way to go before I’ll say their bacon is saved.

  • avatar

    The new Explorer will really be competion for the new Dodge Durango/Magnum (7 passenger, not so nuch the Jeep Grand Cherokee.

  • avatar

    Ralph Gilles said in a recent interview that the extensively revised Sebring/Avenger are going to be Chrysler’s BEST CARS on the market.

  • avatar

    So far their 2 new products that have been brought out, the ram and grand cherokee have been well received. Motor trend was gushing over the GC in this month’s issue.
    So we’ll have to wait and see what’s in store with the other new products. BTW mjz, I read awhile back that the sebring name will be dropped, since it has been damaged beyond repair. The name for the new car is supposed to be “nassau.”

  • avatar


    According to what I read, the dealers don’t like “Nassau” and Chrysler has decided that it will cost too much to launch a new nameplate into the marketplace. So Sebring it is! Actually, other than the current hideous iteration, past Sebrings were OK looking, remember Sebring convertible was the best selling convertible in the good ol USA, before the Germans hit it with the ugly stick.

  • avatar

    mjz, thanks for filling me in. didn’t know that they decided to keep the nameplate. It used to actually sound kinda cool. But after the last sebring, and all of the negative things said about it in the press now when I read or hear the name it’s kinda the same as hearing the word “edsel.” I think it would be cool to bring back the “cordoba” nameplate.
    I do remember the sebring as being the best selling ragtop during the late 90’s. I thought they were actually pretty good looking cars, despite the fact that they all seemed to be white.

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • MitchConner: Could care less what the Chinese do with their dirty money. Screw them. My take is on Ford. Mulally was...
  • Ol Shel: Pay close attention to the mentally ill billionaire. Do as he pleases.
  • Ol Shel: You guys should really teach political science at the grad level, with the way you have it all figured out....
  • sgeffe: How can you do the same on an iOS device? Asking for a friend!
  • sgeffe: What about “circle back?!” Marketing: a degree in bovine feces!

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Corey Lewis
  • Jo Borras
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber