If GM buys Chrysler

mmmikkke · March 10, 2007

Yes, yes, and yes.

silveradoHO · March 10, 2007

Ford??? I would rather buy a donkey and have him pull a trailer. Be faster that way too.

Wingnut · March 10, 2007

I'll be first in line for the PacifImpala SSRT-8.

rogerf · March 10, 2007

I have a difficult time understanding your logic that GM buying Chrysler would have a negative impact on your GM vehicle or drive you to buy a competitor. It is likey true that Chrysler would benefit more than GM on the surface but the goodwill gained from slavaging an American icon can not be measured.

I can tell you from recent experience owning a DCX product that had major issues, this would be a good thing for Chrysler customers as the Daimler-half of DCX has an errogant attitude toward product support and customer care. I have purchased many Chrysler products over the years and can see noticable difference since Daimler got involved. The Iacocca specials I had were far from perfect but I never got ripped-off like I did with this last Jeep. This is a major reason why there are 2 Chevys in my driveway now (and a new truck on the assy line). It's also the reason why my immediate family have purchased 10 GM products in the past 4 years, coming back to GM from buying other brands. GM has been doing things right in recent years, maybe it's just what Chrysler needs.

mmmikkke · March 10, 2007

I love wingnut's distillation of the issue.

Which should prevail? The Dodge Ram? Or the Chevy/GMC pickup? Or parts of each, merged together, into a Chevodge?

It's not good for GM, it's only good for Chrysler.

Why should I care about Chrysler?

And I don't agree that they deserve "icon" status. Maybe "notorious" would be acceptable, but not "icon."

Wingnut · March 10, 2007

And I don't agree that they deserve "icon" status. Maybe "notorious" would be acceptable, but not "icon."

No way dude...That's the new hot rod...The "Iconamaro"...This will share the monster motor with Marge Simpson's dream come true...The Canyonero.

bartlanz · March 10, 2007

And I don't agree that they deserve "icon" status. Maybe "notorious" would be acceptable, but not "icon."

No way dude...That's the new hot rod...The "Iconamaro"...This will share the monster motor with Marge Simpson's dream come true...The Canyonero.

yes, but that would be like the nova, sounds cool in engligh, but iconamaro would be pronounced econamaro in spanish... that would be bad... an econamy sports car? They dont exist... ever notice the similarites between the canionaro and the old suburbans? uncanny, except for the fires...

Mark_in_Tulsa · March 10, 2007

I love wingnut's distillation of the issue.

Which should prevail? The Dodge Ram? Or the Chevy/GMC pickup? Or parts of each, merged together, into a Chevodge?

It's not good for GM, it's only good for Chrysler.

Why should I care about Chrysler?

And I don't agree that they deserve "icon" status. Maybe "notorious" would be acceptable, but not "icon."

Why do you have such a strong hatred for Chrysler?

rogerf · March 10, 2007

I love wingnut's distillation of the issue.

Which should prevail? The Dodge Ram? Or the Chevy/GMC pickup? Or parts of each, merged together, into a Chevodge?

It's not good for GM, it's only good for Chrysler.

Why should I care about Chrysler?

And I don't agree that they deserve "icon" status. Maybe "notorious" would be acceptable, but not "icon."

OK, so icon was a poor chioce of words. Should I wait for my new Silverado so I can get a gas-suckin Hemi?

Why should you care about Chrysler? For the same reason the US goverment gave loan guarantees in 1979 to bail them out. Called protecting our industrial base, jobs & national security.

Seeing how you are from SE Michigan, can I assume you have as many friends, neighbors, and family members with ties to automobile manufacturing as I have living in NE Ohio? Do you want to see another foreign interest, possibly Chineese or even Middle-Eastern interest (which have the cash to do it) controlling a portion of our industrial base?

It's an issue of protecting the American industrial base and in a twisted way as much a national security issue as dependency on imported oil. Nobody wants to discuss the joint approvals of the US and Canadian governments that allowed the whole DCX merger but REQUIRED a fixed percentage of US/Canadians on the DCX Board of Directors. Daimler reniged on this agreement within a few short years. It's time for a US company to take this back, this is the right thing for GM to do. I would not be surprised to find the US & Canadian governments already quietly arranging for this marriage.

True, it will look stupid on the surface but if GM plays this right, the expanded customer base and loyalty gained will pay dividends for years to come. Analysts say half the value of Chrysler is in Jeep alone with another big chunk in mini-van sales which was the same as when Daimler merged with them which should give you a good picture of what to expect after a merger.

Rolandd · March 10, 2007

For any of you who owned a GM truck built before 1988 you should love Chrysler: Dana axles and New Process gear boxes were all Chrysler. New Venture was a joint program between Chrysler and GM to build gear boxes to meet the needs of a changing market in the late 80's and beyond. Without the Dodge Cummins diesel truck you probably would not have the Duramax now as the market for converted 350's was prety soft. Chrysler has produced many cutting edge technologies over the years--you don't want that level of engineering prowess to go away. Competition breeds innovation--the truck you drive today would not be what it is whithout Chrysler and Ford. I hope if GM buys Chrysler they have the wherewithall to keep Dodge intact.

hybridatsun350 · March 10, 2007

I was reading that if GM were to buy Chrysler they would most likely build the Ram on the GM platform to save costs. But that got me thinking...why the heck would I buy a Chevy over a Dodge or vise-versa? They would be the same d**n truck.

Rolandd · March 10, 2007

I was reading that if GM were to buy Chrysler they would most likely build the Ram on the GM platform to save costs. But that got me thinking...why the heck would I buy a Chevy over a Dodge or vise-versa? They would be the same d**n truck.

Same reason as some folks buy Chevy and some buy GMC

mmmikkke · March 10, 2007

The poll results thus far with 14 votes:

14 % disgusted

21 % more likely to buy a Tundra

21 % more likely to buy a Ford

So 80% of the respondents to the poll are solidly in the GM camp, no matter what happens. This could be interpreted to mean that 80% are patriotic and buy American. Sounds plausible, right?

Look, I want American workers to keep their jobs, and a lot of us do, and that's part of the reason we buy American. But GM buying Chrysler doesn't help here.

I start with the (arguable) assumption, supported by the above poll results, that there is a fixed number of "American" car and truck customers who are predisposed to buying American. Total "American" vehicle sales will remain at a certain level, regardless of breakdown between Ford, GM, and Chrysler. If Chrysler's percentage drops to zero, Ford and GM both go up, capturing those previous Chrysler customers.

True, there might be a small percentage of Chrysler customers who only buy Chrysler because they want to validate their previous purchase of Chrysler products. They're more loyal to "their previous purchase" than they are to the brand per-se. Those customers might not remain American customers.

In my mind, there two options to proceed.

1. Investors buy Chrysler and it spirals downward and is eventually sold off in pieces. The factories remain factories, they don't blow them up, and the engineering facilities remain engineering facilities, they're not blown up either. The existing Chrysler customer base, being mostly driven by loyalty to American products, buys Fords and GM products. This helps the bottom lines at both Ford and GM, and they are able to justify buying off some old Chrysler facilities to engineer and build new Ford and GM products. Total number of American vehicles built remains mostly unchanged; total employed in the American auto industry remains mostly unchanged.

2. GM props up Chrysler despite it being a damaged brand. The obnoxious commercials, gaudy styling, and bottom-of-class product quality continue despite the market having repudiated all three. GM takes a hit as it no longer can claim the high ground for product quality. GMopar becomes a tainted brand. Previously loyal customers abandon GM for Ford. Eventually everybody abandons American manufacturers entirely.

I know this is just an academic exercise as this little thread isn't going to change anything, but it's a perfect topic for a forum and this GM-trucks site needs a discussion like this to liven it up once in a while.

So if you disagree with me, let's hear what you have to say.

overlord1 · March 10, 2007

I for one would like to see Chrysler revert to American ownership. Let the Germans stick to building overpriced status symbols since that is their forte. I have owned a few Chrysler products in the past and they were of mediocre reliability I will admit. In fact my first car was a 1981 Dodge Omni which my dad bought brand new and which I inherited on my 16th birthday. That car had so many issues I can't list them all here. I also owned two Jeep Grand Cherokees which were much better quality but still not up to par with the Ford or GM products I have owned. However both Jeeps were awesome off-road vehicles, much better in that respect than the Ford Explorer I also owned. If anything I think GM should keep the Jeep brand and possibly sell off the rest. I think current and future Chrysler customers would benefit the most as quality and customer service would surely improve if the General took the reigns. I would view a GM buyout of Chrysler as a positive in the long run.