Jim Press Is Insane. Still.

Edward Niedermeyer
by Edward Niedermeyer

In a recent interview with AutoObserver, Chrysler’s Jim Press tries desperately to state the case that somehow things could be worse at Auburn Hills. In the process he piles on the layers of denial that keep the smallest Detroit automaker senselessly hanging on. “It’s hard to say things are good when sales were only down 25 percent [retail],” press tells AO’s Michelle Krebs. “That’s terrible, but it’s less terrible than the industry decline of 40 percent.” It’s also less terrible than the 44 percent overall sales drop that ChryCo endured last month, but then the fact that Press only mentions retail sales kind of says it all. Especially considering he made AO’s editors include [retail] in his otherwise misleading (or is that self-deluding?) quote. But, “things aren’t so bad,” concludes Press. “At 80,000 vehicles sold in February, we’re doing OK.” Apparently we will know things are bad when Press starts lying about sales rather than pathologically misrepresenting them.

“Looking at retail in prior months, we did pretty well. We’ve shown we’ve been able to cope in these conditions, particularly since we were the first to lose leasing and the first to encounter the credit situation,” says Press lowering the bar just a little further. Press pimps the “intentional lowering of fleet sales” meme with gusto, despite admitting that Chrysler has more 2008 inventory than its competitors. Which explains why ChryCo’s incentives “look” high, argues Press, who swears that 2009 transaction prices are “pretty much in line with competitors in most cases.” Press completes his assault on reality by disputing Edmunds’ $5,556 per vehicle incentive average without providing an alternative figure.

As “OK” as things are though, Chrysler is not making money at current sales rates, says Press. “No one is making money. That’s not in the cards until we are in a much more normal environment in the marketplace.” Pay no attention to the incentives behind the curtain. But Press is blithely optimistic. “Perhaps the rate of decline [in auto sales] will slow down,” he says. Perhaps Jim, perhaps. “If we get [bailed out],” he continues, “we’re viable and can continue to invest in future. If we get the relationship with Fiat, we’ll go from viable to being in really good shape.” Press’s blithering optimism would be almost heartening in these trying times if it werent so disingenuous and cynical. Unrelenting (and wholly unfounded) optimism is the only thing that can win Chrysler more bailout bucks, and those tax dollars are the only chance Chrysler has at surviving. That Chrysler’s retail sales are only dropping at half the rate of the larger market (and its own overall sales) is hardly “vaibility.” Or cause for optimism.

Edward Niedermeyer
Edward Niedermeyer

More by Edward Niedermeyer

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 29 comments
  • Superbadd75 Superbadd75 on Mar 10, 2009
    I’m not crying for him. He knew (or should have) that Chrysler was in deep trouble when he made the switch. Undoubtedly, his pay package included a huge upside if he was able to save Chrysler. If he can save Chrysler, this guy needs to run for President! I don't think anyone can shine that turd.
  • Dolometh Dolometh on Mar 10, 2009

    i wonder if jim press and bob lutz go to the same tanning salon?

  • Thomas Same here....but keep in mind that EVs are already much more efficient than ICE vehicles. They need to catch up in all the other areas you mentioned.
  • Analoggrotto It's great to see TTAC kicking up the best for their #1 corporate sponsor. Keep up the good work guys.
  • John66ny Title about self driving cars, linked podcast about headlight restoration. Some relationship?
  • Jeff JMII--If I did not get my Maverick my next choice was a Santa Cruz. They are different but then they are both compact pickups the only real compact pickups on the market. I am glad to hear that the Santa Cruz will have knobs and buttons on it for 2025 it would be good if they offered a hybrid as well. When I looked at both trucks it was less about brand loyalty and more about price, size, and features. I have owned 2 gm made trucks in the past and liked both but gm does not make a true compact truck and neither does Ram, Toyota, or Nissan. The Maverick was the only Ford product that I wanted. If I wanted a larger truck I would have kept either my 99 S-10 extended cab with a 2.2 I-4 5 speed or my 08 Isuzu I-370 4 x 4 with the 3.7 I-5, tow package, heated leather seats, and other niceties and it road like a luxury vehicle. I believe the demand is there for other manufacturers to make compact pickups. The proposed hybrid Toyota Stout would be a great truck. Subaru has experience making small trucks and they could make a very competitive compact truck and Subaru has a great all wheel drive system. Chevy has a great compact pickup offered in South America called the Montana which gm could make in North America and offered in the US and Canada. Ram has a great little compact truck offered in South America as well. Compact trucks are a great vehicle for those who want an open bed for hauling but what a smaller more affordable efficient practical vehicle.
  • Groza George I don’t care about GM’s anything. They have not had anything of interest or of reasonable quality in a generation and now solely stay on business to provide UAW retirement while they slowly move production to Mexico.
Next