GM Dealer Reinstatement Puts Pressure On Chrysler

Edward Niedermeyer
by Edward Niedermeyer

GM’s recent reinstatement of 661 culled dealers has put pressure back on Chrysler to come to arrangement with the dealers it shed during last year’s bankruptcy and bailout. Rep. Chris VanHollen, the sixth ranking Democrat in the House or Representatives, tells Automotive News [sub] that with GM buckling to dealer pressure, the time has come for Chrysler to follow suit. “There’s no quicker or easier way to build this network than to reinstate its terminated car dealerships,” says VanHollen, who drafted much of congress’s dealer arbitration legislation. The Committee to Restore Dealer Rights contacted Chrysler CEO Sergio Marchionne “to discuss the reinstatement of the rejected dealers who had their franchises so abruptly taken and were unfairly terminated.” The response?

We believe that all communications concerning the subject matter of the arbitration should be between counsel and request that your clients follow this procedure in the future. Please ask them not to send such communications to Mr. Marchionne or any other Chrysler personnel.

Oh snap! Chrysler isn’t going down without a fight… even if that means taking on the representatives who have oversight of the government’s eight percent stake in the automaker.


GM’s justification for reinstating dealers was that Chairman and CEO Ed Whitacre wanted more sales volume at all costs, a goal that should probably resonate with Chrysler, considering the firm’s terminally moribund sales. But apparently Chrysler would rather pick a political fight to axe its old dealers.

Chrysler’s argument: unlike GM, which gave its dealers time to wind down their operations, Chrysler made its dealer cull effective upon exiting bankruptcy. As a result, the New, New Chrysler is able to make the argument that technically these dealers have never had a franchise agreement with the company in its current form. You can’t legally reinstate something you never had a contract with,” anonymous Chrysler sources tell Automotive News [sub]. “Dealer appointments will be a function of the arbitrations.”

Culled dealers aren’t buying it though. “Chrysler’s looking for technicalities to hide behind,” says Alan Spitzer of the CtRDR. “The law allows them to negotiate outside arbitration.” Interestingly, both GM and Chrysler have dropped their campaigns against a Colorado dealer reinstatement bill.

Meanwhile, Chrysler Canada dealers are eying Chrysler’s reborn Five Star incentives with envy [via The Windsor Star], as apparently the mothership has seen fit to not include Canadian dealers in the program.With dealer-related challenges at every turn, Chrysler’s “transition year” is going to be even more fraught with difficulties than we had initially thought.

Edward Niedermeyer
Edward Niedermeyer

More by Edward Niedermeyer

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 5 comments
  • Mtymsi Mtymsi on Mar 10, 2010

    As stated, the big difference between the culled GM dealers and those of Chryco is most of the GM stores are still open and I think all of the Chryco stores are closed. Big difference. Unless there was a change in Chryco's thinking why would Marchionne or anybody else at Chryco want to get involved?

  • Jimboy Jimboy on Mar 10, 2010

    I've said it before and I'll keep saying it. Chrysler didn't cull enough dealers. The level of service and customer satisfaction at Chrysler/Dodge/Jeep dealerships is horrific, and the way to kickstart change is to scare the sh*t out of the remaining ones. The only chance for Chrysler to survive is to get people back into their showrooms, and most of us won't go near a current dealership. My own experience's with the local dealers have only reinforced that opinion. While I love Chrysler's and have owned many, My next Chrysler purchase will be a private transaction, and I'll take care of the vehicle with non-dealer service, warranty be damned!

  • Kjhkjlhkjhkljh kljhjkhjklhkjh I own my house 100% paid for at age 52. the answer is still NO.-28k (realistically) would take 8 years to offset my gas truck even with its constant repair bills (thanks chevy)-Still takes too long to charge UNTIL solidsate batteries are a thing and 80% in 15 minutes becomes a reality (for ME anyways, i get others are willing to wait)For the rest of the market, especially people in dense cityscape, apartments dens rentals it just isnt feasible yet IMO.
  • ToolGuy I do like the fuel economy of a 6-cylinder engine. 😉
  • Carson D I'd go with the RAV4. It will last forever, and someone will pay you for it if you ever lose your survival instincts.
  • THX1136 A less expensive EV would make it more attractive. For the record, I've never purchased a brand new vehicle as I have never been able to afford anything but used. I think the same would apply to an EV. I also tend to keep a vehicle way longer than most folks do - 10+ years. If there was a more affordable one right now then other things come to bear. There are currently no chargers in my immediate area (town of 16K). I don't know if I can afford to install the necessary electrical service to put one in my car port right now either. Other than all that, I would want to buy what I like from a cosmetic standpoint. That would be a Charger EV which, right now, doesn't exist and I couldn't afford anyway. I would not buy an EV just to be buying an EV. Nothing against them either. Most of my constraints are purely financial being 71 with a disabled wife and on a fixed income.
  • ToolGuy Two more thoughts, ok three:a) Will this affordable EV have expressive C/D pillars, detailing on the rocker panels and many many things happening around the headlamps? Asking for a friend.b) Will this affordable EV have interior soft touch plastics and materials lifted directly from a European luxury sedan? Because if it does not, the automotive journalists are going to mention it and that will definitely spoil my purchase decision.c) Whatever the nominal range is, I need it to be 2 miles more, otherwise no deal. (+2 rule is iterative)
Next