Monday, January 26, 2009

Of Chrysler, Fiat and Diplomacy.

Over the weekend, The Economist published an interesting article on the possible Chrysler/Fiat joint venture, along with a picture of the revived, succesful (and very attractive) Fiat 500, which Chrysler wants to make here.

It would be tragic if this sensible merger of sorts would fail to go through because of politicians arguing that taxpayers should not foot the bill for Chrysler to be bought out by "them darn furners". Oh please. We would have a global company which would continue to produce vehicles and parts in the US, and would produce more fuel efficent vehicles to boot. Jeeps would be sold worldwide by Fiat, which has not had a credible SUV in its lineup.
What SHOULD happen is that the American and Italian governments, motivated by self interest on both sides, should begin discussions on a joint bailout package, designed to create a truly global company. Aircraft manufacturers have done this for decades. The only caveat is that Chrysler may be too far gone to survive the negotiations.
If Chrysler does go under, this scribler will always look back at this as one of the great missed opportunities of the global automotive marketplace. And a lasting memorial to the hypocrisy of promoting globalization abroad but denying its benefits at home.

Tuesday, January 20, 2009

Chrysler & Fiat - Finally a Wedding to be Happy About!

The automotive world is agog at the news that Chrysler and Fiat are getting together. The latest news indicates that Fiat will get a 35% share of Chrysler, but stressed that it would not throw actual money at the venture.
This deal makes sense on so many levels. Firstly, and perhaps most importantly given the disastrous ChryDaimler affair, it is a meeting of the minds. Both Fiat and Chrysler are renowned for their design teams, and both have produced noteworthy designs in the last decade. The latest from Fiat, a remake of the Fiat 500 of the 60's and 70's (think Mini) is a popular success.
Chrysler gets access to Fiat's successful global distribution system. Fiat has made inroads into world markets by going local where it is able, and selling low cost vehicles to poorer countries, often assembled there. Chrysler gets to supply Fiat with upmarket vehicles in countries where Fiat has gained a foothold but has no "aspirational" or "halo" vehicles to its lineup. Fiat will also supply technology for small engines to Chrysler, which it badly needs.
Like any marriage, it is not a perfect union. Since we started on the "meeting of the minds" theme, there is one negative factor that both companies have to work hard to expel: Quality. Fiat owners have two moments of happiness, it is often quipped; one when they buy the car, and another when they sell it. Both Fiat and Chrysler have made steps in the direction of quality control, and certainly their vehicles are far superior to their ancestors of yester year. But the public memory is a long one, and the road back from the quality abyss is long and hard.
Then there is Nissan, the "Lady Camila" of the marriage. Nissan recently signed an accord with Chrysler to make it's light trucks and supply technology in other areas, including the development of a small vehicle for the US market. It happens that Nissan is also part of the Renault automotive family, and Renault is a direct competitor to Fiat in Europe and many developing markets as well. IF (and it is a big IF) Renault, Nissan, Fiat and Chrysler could be convinced to join forces, we would be talking about a global automotive powerhouse. But it would not come cheap, as the operations would have to be severely streamlined in order to eliminate model and market overlap. There is also the question of personalities, which includes some titans: Sergio Marchionne (of Fiat) does not suffer fools, and Carlos Ghosn (of Renault) makes fools suffer.
Still and all, this is the best deal Chrysler could get into. It breathes a bit of hope in an industry staggering under economic pressure. And for us car nuts, it means we will soon see Fiats back again in the US - however quirky they were, we always loved their Italian flair and they will make the automotive landscape a better place. Thanks Fiat! (And I never thought I would ever say that.....)

Tuesday, January 13, 2009

Detroit Auto Show - The Difference Between a Winner & a Loser

So, the most depressing Detroit Auto Show ever is upon us. To be fair, the whole scene is so depressing I have been reading about it less than I should because I am worried about my supply of Zoloft and Prozac. Still, one thing is immediately obvious. Ford has a plan. GM thinks it has a plan. And Chrysler wishes it had a plan.

Ford is going down the road of hybrids in a big way, with a view to a fully electric vehicle at some point. Whether or not this effort is aimed more at congress than at the consumer, only time, and the price of gas, will tell.

GM appears to be pinning its future hopes on the Volt. Like the name implies, this is a purely electrical car, which appears to have been extremely well developed. However, the MSRP is said to hover around $40,000 for its 2010 introduction. Unless gas hits $6 a gallon, my guess is that GM will have some trouble getting people to flock to show rooms for a $40,000 vehicle with relatively novel technology and that looks vaguely like a mix of a large Toyota Prius and a Chevy Malibu. This is a shame, since the vehicle actually drives extremely well, sources say.

Chrysler seems to be in disarray. They have a pretty sketchy future lineup. The Chrysler Aspen/Dodge Durango hybrid has supposedly been scrapped for 2010. Who is going to buy a one-year production hybrid vehicle? Someone please tell Chrysler to get a plan or start selling off divisions. Last month, while in south Florida, I noticed one Chrysler dealer who was promoting "buy one get one free". If you bought a Jeep Commander at full price, they would throw in a PT Cruiser for free. No, I am not kidding. If you took the time to read the small print as you rushed out the door, you would see that this offer applied only to new 2007 Jeep Commanders. Yes, you read right, the cars that had been sitting on the lot for almost TWO YEARS. Chrysler may be in worse shape, from a strategic view point as well as a financial viewpoint than anyone imagines.

Monday, January 5, 2009

Chrysler Oh Chrysler, Where Art Thou?

So, it seems that Chrysler is inching ever closer to the abyss. This is truly dissapointing, given the Chrysler should have been the poster child for bailouts. When Lee Iaccoca steered the company away from the abyss, with the help of a major bailout loan, he did so driving a series of new and clever vehicle designs (ok, the K-car was pretty bland, but it was revolutionary in that it introduced front wheel drive and smaller vehicles into the American mainstream of domestic cars). The initial lineup included a snazzy fastback, a european-inspired hatchback and the K-car. Chrylser then followed with the minivan, for which Mr. Iacocca has been nominated for sainthood by the Soccer Moms of America. With these vehicles, Chrysler got design cred on the street.
Interestingly, Chrysler let its truck lineup languish until around 1994 when the new Dodge Ram lineup appeared, and it too was a design hit. Profits form trucks and SUV's proved to be addictive, however, and this may have something to do with the demise of Chrysler.
Quality was never outstanding, despite revolutionary designs, and in the end, lower pricing did not trump consumer confidence. Belatedly, Chrysler has tried to improve these quality pecadilloes but on a shoestring budget and no cash, what can they really accomplish at this point?
There was of course the much celebrated (and then despised) "merger" with Daimler Benz. In theory it was a match made in heaven. Chrysler design for dowdy german vehicles in exchange for German reliability and engineering. But strange things happen when strange bedfellows get together. Egos, corporate culture and resentment spelled disaster. Chrysler did get some of the slightly past the "use by" date technology, including several bits of the last generation E-class engineering (Charger, 300C, among others) and CLK (Crossfire). The Germans, however don't merge well. Look at BMW and Rover. OK, they got the Mini and ran with it. But they got Land Rover and promptly introduced a BMW SUV, the X-5, instead of using the synergy to develop an SUV with off-road credentials.
The result is that Chrysler desperately needs suitor. The problem is, who is going to buy an ailing car maker in 2009? As I have scribbled in the past, Chrysler is a tasty cake in small slices, but no-one wants to take the whole thing home for fear of indigestion. My bet is, someone will be buying Jeep, and soon.