The Fiat-Chrysler Strategy: Now Featuring Jeep And Alfa

Edward Niedermeyer
by Edward Niedermeyer

It’s becoming increasingly clear as time goes on that the Chrysler five year plan promulgated in November 2009 was merely a stopgap strategy aimed at stabilizing the then-recently-acquired firm while CEO Sergio Marchionne plotted a strategic course globally. Now, with news that Alfa is going to be re-launched with the US as its major focus ( possibly replacing Dodge), we’re getting a better and better picture of where the Sergio Show is headed with his transatlantic alliance. In an interview with Automotive News Europe [sub], Marchionne gives the latest snapshot

In his vision, Alfa Romeo and Jeep both have the DNA and the rich history capable to make them the alliance’s two global brands. “We need to continue to globalize Jeep and Alfa, so the development of architectures and engines that are designed to support these two brands is crucial, and everything else becomes almost secondary,” he said.

Chrysler clearly won’t be a global brand, as its products are rebadged as Lancias in Italy. Fiat will offer full lineups in Europe and South America, but only the Fiat 500 will be a truly global brand, in a role Marchionne compares to BMW’s MINI. Dodge doesn’t even rate a mention in this interview, which can only be interpreted as more evidence that it will be lucky to survive at all.

Though the alliance’s two namesake brands, Fiat and Chrysler, won’t be used on a global basis, branding will be extremely important to the company’s future. In Marchionne’s words:

By 2014, we expect Fiat-Chrysler to reach 5.9 million units and we will have just three main architectures that drive more than 80 percent of that total volume. I have never lived through a period with this level of complexity and this level of optionality

It’s not surprising that Marchionne has chosen Alfa and Jeep to represent his cobbled-together empire globally; clearly they are the two strongest brands in what is now a somewhat bloated portfolio. But this latest development raises two fundamental questions: first, what happens to Chrysler/Lancia and Ram/Dodge, and second, can Alfa and Jeep really move 80% of their volume to three common platforms and maintain their brand integrity? Because if not, it won’t take long before Marchionne finds himself with three platforms and a whole mess of compromised, past-their-prime brands. It’s good to see that Fiat-Chrysler global strategy is beginning to take shape, but this one is clearly not without its risks.


Edward Niedermeyer
Edward Niedermeyer

More by Edward Niedermeyer

Comments
Join the conversation
3 of 67 comments
  • Zackman Zackman on Oct 31, 2011

    The more I read about Chrysler's comings and goings, I also believe it's just a matter of time before it disappears altogether. Italian cars in the U.S. making a big splash? I don't believe it will ever happen. Of course I've been known to be wrong once in a while. Trouble is, there are simply too many auto brands and models and too few buyers out there.

  • Mjz Mjz on Oct 31, 2011

    eldard: Maserati IS being positioned against the Germans, Maserati is to compete against Porsche.

    • Eldard Eldard on Oct 31, 2011

      So why not concentrate on that instead of Alfa? Bring it only to the US when the Tata Nano comes. That's its real competition, anyway.

  • ToolGuy First picture: I realize that opinions vary on the height of modern trucks, but that entry door on the building is 80 inches tall and hits just below the headlights. Does anyone really believe this is reasonable?Second picture: I do not believe that is a good parking spot to be able to access the bed storage. More specifically, how do you plan to unload topsoil with the truck parked like that? Maybe you kids are taller than me.
  • ToolGuy The other day I attempted to check the engine oil in one of my old embarrassing vehicles and I guess the red shop towel I used wasn't genuine Snap-on (lots of counterfeits floating around) plus my driveway isn't completely level and long story short, the engine seized 3 minutes later.No more used cars for me, and nothing but dealer service from here on in (the journalists were right).
  • Doughboy Wow, Merc knocks it out of the park with their naming convention… again. /s
  • Doughboy I’ve seen car bras before, but never car beards. ZZ Top would be proud.
  • Bkojote Allright, actual person who knows trucks here, the article gets it a bit wrong.First off, the Maverick is not at all comparable to a Tacoma just because they're both Hybrids. Or lemme be blunt, the butch-est non-hybrid Maverick Tremor is suitable for 2/10 difficulty trails, a Trailhunter is for about 5/10 or maybe 6/10, just about the upper end of any stock vehicle you're buying from the factory. Aside from a Sasquatch Bronco or Rubicon Jeep Wrangler you're looking at something you're towing back if you want more capability (or perhaps something you /wish/ you were towing back.)Now, where the real world difference should play out is on the trail, where a lot of low speed crawling usually saps efficiency, especially when loaded to the gills. Real world MPG from a 4Runner is about 12-13mpg, So if this loaded-with-overlander-catalog Trailhunter is still pulling in the 20's - or even 18-19, that's a massive improvement.
Next