Not so Hot Anymore: Fiat Chrysler Changes Sales Reporting Method, Ends Winning Streak

Steph Willems
by Steph Willems

In response to media reports, a lawsuit, and federal investigations into potential sales figure tampering, Fiat Chrysler Automobiles is changing the way it records sales.

This means that the automaker’s much-touted 75-month sales streak is dead. FCA admits that under the new method, its year-over-year monthly sales gains ended in September 2013. Ad copy is likely being rewritten as you read this.

FCA is accused of inflating its monthly sales numbers by adding sales at the end of the month, then rolling them back at the beginning of the next. An Illinois dealer group alleges racketeering, with dealer payouts in exchange for false sales reports.

A report published by Automotive News yesterday claimed that the automaker uncovered the practice during a review. Internal sources claim the review turned up between 5,000 and 6,000 uncompleted sales that found their way onto sales tallies. U.S. sales chief Reid Bigland reportedly put a stop to the practice.

In a statement, FCA said the new methodology will be applied to July 2016 sales:

The objective of this new methodology is to provide in FCA US’s judgment the best available estimate of the number of FCA US vehicles sold to end users through the end of a particular month applying a consistent and transparent methodology. It continues to include some level of estimation in respect of, for example, unwound transactions that straddle a month end and fleet deliveries, which may be placed into service at various times after shipment and delivery. FCA US believes, however, that the consistency in application and transparency of this new methodology provides the most appropriate data for the limited uses to which the monthly vehicle unit sales data should be applied.

FCA took the methodology and applied it to data collected between January 1, 2011 to June 30, 2016. When the “unwound” sales were removed, the numbers differed from those it reported at the time.

“Annual sales volumes under the new methodology for each year … are within approximately 0.7% of the annual unit sales volumes previously reported,” the automaker stated.

Responding to claims of sales tampering, FCA claims it used the previous methodology for 30 years, which was similar to that used by other manufacturers. However, a problem exists with its New Vehicle Delivery Report (where retail sales data is collected from dealers) and unwound sales.

“It is admittedly also possible that a dealer may register the sale in an effort to meet a volume objective (without a specific customer supporting the transaction),” FCA stated. “There is, however, no obvious economic incentive for a dealer to do so, since FCA US’s policy is to reverse all incentives due or paid to a dealer that resulted from the unwound retail sales transaction.”

[Image: Fiat Chrysler Automobiles]

Steph Willems
Steph Willems

More by Steph Willems

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 24 comments
  • BuzzDog BuzzDog on Jul 26, 2016

    Sigh, another round of sales shenanigans on the part of an entity that produces Chryslers. Makes me wonder if there's a sales bank of unsold vehicles piling up at the Michigan State Fairgrounds.

  • Wolfman3k5 Wolfman3k5 on Jul 27, 2016

    FCA still builds vehicles of questionable quality, never mind bellow average reliability. To say that many of their products are POS vehicles would be high praise... They are terrible, and the cost cutting is obvious to the point that many FCA built cars are at least as flimsy as Russian cars. Don't believe me? Stop by any Dodge/Chrysler dealer and see for yourself. Better yet, rent a low mileage Chrysler Town&Country, or a 200, or even a Dart and just see for yourself how dreadful their products are. If FCA goes belly up it's because of the craptastic products that they're pedling.

  • Redapple2 Love the wheels
  • Redapple2 Good luck to them. They used to make great cars. 510. 240Z, Sentra SE-R. Maxima. Frontier.
  • Joe65688619 Under Ghosn they went through the same short-term bottom-line thinking that GM did in the 80s/90s, and they have not recovered say, to their heyday in the 50s and 60s in terms of market share and innovation. Poor design decisions (a CVT in their front-wheel drive "4-Door Sports Car", model overlap in a poorly performing segment (they never needed the Altima AND the Maxima...what they needed was one vehicle with different drivetrain, including hybrid, to compete with the Accord/Camry, and decontenting their vehicles: My 2012 QX56 (I know, not a Nissan, but the same holds for the Armada) had power rear windows in the cargo area that could vent, a glass hatch on the back door that could be opened separate from the whole liftgate (in such a tall vehicle, kinda essential if you have it in a garage and want to load the trunk without having to open the garage door to make room for the lift gate), a nice driver's side folding armrest, and a few other quality-of-life details absent from my 2018 QX80. In a competitive market this attention to detai is can be the differentiator that sell cars. Now they are caught in the middle of the market, competing more with Hyundai and Kia and selling discounted vehicles near the same price points, but losing money on them. They invested also invested a lot in niche platforms. The Leaf was one of the first full EVs, but never really evolved. They misjudged the market - luxury EVs are selling, small budget models not so much. Variable compression engines offering little in terms of real-world power or tech, let a lot of complexity that is leading to higher failure rates. Aside from the Z and GT-R (low volume models), not much forced induction (whether your a fan or not, look at what Honda did with the CR-V and Acura RDX - same chassis, slap a turbo on it, make it nicer inside, and now you can sell it as a semi-premium brand with higher markup). That said, I do believe they retain the technical and engineering capability to do far better. About time management realized they need to make smarter investments and understand their markets better.
  • Kwik_Shift_Pro4X Off-road fluff on vehicles that should not be off road needs to die.
  • Kwik_Shift_Pro4X Saw this posted on social media; “Just bought a 2023 Tundra with the 14" screen. Let my son borrow it for the afternoon, he connected his phone to listen to his iTunes.The next day my insurance company raised my rates and added my son to my policy. The email said that a private company showed that my son drove the vehicle. He already had his own vehicle that he was insuring.My insurance company demanded he give all his insurance info and some private info for proof. He declined for privacy reasons and my insurance cancelled my policy.These new vehicles with their tech are on condition that we give up our privacy to enter their world. It's not worth it people.”
Next