Mercedes, Not US, To Bail Out Chrysler

In a huge surprise, Chrysler has decided to decline US government help and
instead accept help from Mercedes, which still owns 20% of Chrysler. Under
the plan, Chrysler will introduce competitive platforms starting in June
2009, with a total of three new platforms available by December 2009.

The V6 versions of the Chrysler 300 and Dodge Charger will be replaced by
front drive models with better fuel mileage and more interior room. The
Hemi powered rear drive 300 and Charger will be retained to fill their
proper role as specialty models built mostly for status rather than for
wide market appeal.

In the midsize segment, the current Mitsubishi sourced Sebring and Avenger,
awkwardly styled in the theme of a brick set on edge, will be replaced by
lower, sleeker, and more aerodynamic models. In the compact segement, the
PT Cruiser will be retained since it has proven appeal as a styling
curiousity. The Dodge Caliber, also curiously styled but without a retro
look to work in its favor, will be replaced by a conventionally styled
small car which will have wider appeal.

Mercedes announcement that these changes can be accomplished in a six to
twelve month time period and at a cost of a mere $1.6 billion initially
baffled industry observers. "I wondered how Chrysler could produce three
new lines of roomy and economical front drive cars - cars that are right
for America - so quickly and for so little money" said Joseph Camel of the
Brand Research Institute.

But then came the surprising answer. The solution to fixing Chrysler's
current unsaleable car lineup is merely to replace the current cars with
the cars they replaced: 2004 Concorde/Intrepid, the 2007 Sebring/Stratus,
and the 2002 Neon.

"This is an investment in the future" said Mercedes spokesman Heinreich
Tungensheek. "By spending this money, we expect the value of our 20% stake
in Chrysler will eventually rise to zero!"

 

Comments4u wrote:

Oh this should be good. C4U has been unusually quiet lately...

OR to put a finer point on it, to revert to the lineup BEFORE F***ING
DAIMLER SCREWED UP CHRYSLER THE FIRST TIME!! The car-knowledgeable who
read this will realize that the vehicles he mentioned are ALL
pre-Daimler designs.

I don't care who you are, that there's funny.

 

You should be ashamed of yourself... Now I have to clean *another*
keyboard. I'm going to get a water/coffee proof keyboard, this is
getting to be too much trouble!

 

"Joe Camel", eh?

 

Don't understand the maths

"...we expect the value of our 20% stake in Chrysler will eventually rise to
zero!"

FALL to zero maybe?

DAS

To send an e-mail directly replace "spam" with "schmetterling"

 

(Dori - it's satire)

--
Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with the letter 'x')

 

The is funny and makes some sense, but is it really a time to poke more
fun at Chrysler robber Mercedes?

This is quite smart, but sorry Chrysler the 300M I recently purchased
for a few songs should last me for 8+ years.
Of course keep the RWD 300C for the police who like dangerous chases.

I guess if it sells, why not. IMO it's styling is worse than the Caliper.

Too bad his will come too late for me.
Actually the Compass would be easier to change for my liking, simply
replace the Jeep front end. Chrysler doesn't need two Jeep front end
cars in this class.
My dealer told me they just don't know how to sell the split personalty
Compass. (true story!)

The changes would be relatively minor, if they haven't sold the tooling
to Russia and China.

Nope, a slight revision of the mid 90s LH and the 91+ Sebring, with the
current drive trains (less the 2.7L V6) would have done it.
Too late for me again Chrysler.

It might even rise a bit above zero, but Mercedes just doesn't know how
to make a longer term hit with Chrysler. They don't understand NA.

 

,,,,,, yes, but the math is probably stil correct.... rise to zero

cheers guenter

 

**DO NOT TOPPOST!**

*WOOSH*

Missed that one completely, didn't you!

 

Interestingly, it was the Chrysler people who talked the Daimler
people out of buying into Nissan (and let Renault snap it up
instead). The Chrysler people said, Hey, we've worked with Mitsubishi
in the past, they're good, buy into them instead.

So instead of Nissan platforms, we get Mitsubishi platforms for fwd
Chryslers. Daimler bought into Mitsubishi, and found they were
covering up warranty problems (Mitsu gave Daimler MitsubishiFuso
trucks in compensation, which they still own). Can't blame the
Daimler folks for having it in for the Chrysler people after that~

 

You didn't understand that this was a satire and
likely has no basis in fact.

 

Its a fact Chrysler LLC has negative value. Its worse off now than
when Mercedes sold it. And if you review the "sale" transaction,
you'll find that despite saying they got something for Chrysler,
Mercedes covered enough other expenses that their net from the "sale"
was negative. None of which changes the humor of the original
article! <G>

 

Strange "facts" you're using here Lloyd.

I don't know who talked Schrempp out of buying Nissan (you're talking
like you were a mouse in the corner during the meetings). Nissan was
on the brink. There was nothing to "snap up". Taking on Nissan was
taking on a huge risk. Oh, yea, Ghosen did well, but would Schrempp
have?

Chrysler already had money in Mitsubishi. They didn't put more into
Mitsubishi as an alternative to buying Nissan. When Mitsubishi got
into trouble, and Schrempp wanted to invest more, the Mercedes board
stopped him.

You say Chrysler people had confidence in Mitsubishi, but the actions
they've taken over the years don't show that. Their involvement with
Mitsubishi was usually to fill a need on a temporary basis.

When Chevy and Ford started selling the Vega and Pinto, Chrysler
sourced the Colt and then the Arrow from Mitsubishi. But then when
they were able to build their own small car, the Omni/Horizon, they
cut out Mitsubishi in that size class. But even smaller cars had
become popular, so they, again unable to build one, sourced a smaller
Colt from Mitsubishi, one down in the Ford Fiesta/Toyota Starlet
class.

When they needed a larger 4 cylinder in the early 80s, they bought
Mitsubishi engines, but only until they could expand the 2.2 into the
2.5. When that happened, the Mitsubishi 2.6 was gone. When gas
stayed cheap and they needed a V6 in 87, they bought the Mitsubishi
V6. But only until they could develop their own V6.

Chrysler bought small trucks from Mitsubishi, but again, only until
they could build their own. Interestingly, Mitsubishi now buys the
Dakota from Chrysler to sell under their name.

With the Neon, Chrysler made a decision yet again to build their own
small car rather than buy something from Mitsubishi to sell. And so
after having had a lot of Mitsubishi products in the showroom for
years, they were down to a couple of specialty coupes, with the rest
of their product range populated by their own products.

Then under Mercedes, it was decided all the midsizes, not just the
coupes, would be bought from Mitsubishi. The standard small car went
away, replaced by the Cruiser and Caliber, and Mercedes didn't even
bother to plan for a normal small car at all.

And what's this fixation with wagons? The Caliber as a Neon
replacement? The Magnum as an Intrepid replacement? (Remember there
was initally to be no Charger.)

I don't see that Mercedes missed anything by failing to "snap up" a
decimated Nissan. After all, they took a healthy company, Chrysler,
and ran it into the dirt. And the actions over the years indicate a
consistent effort by Chrysler people not to rely on Mitsubishi.

 

You should READ, before you post.

 

And didn't Renault already have cooperation with and/or shareholding in
Nissan?

BTW, aren't you kidding yourself that it was Mercedes that spoiled a healthy
Chrysler? Chrysler was a vehicle (pun intended) for Merc to have large
sales in the US (and to give the German executives an excuse to pay
themselves ridiculously high American wages). Hardly motives to wreck
Chrysler.

Blame the foreigners....

DAS

To send an e-mail directly replace "spam" with "schmetterling"

 

You mean from a minus value?

DAS

To send an e-mail directly replace "spam" with "schmetterling"
---

 

Hello Dictator, PeterD.

Don't bottom-post. I find it intensely inconvenient and irritating as I
have to scroll though loads of repeat stuff just to get to a few pearls of
wisdom. But I only tell you that and not the other bottom-posters as it is
a case of chacun a son gout.

DAS

To send an e-mail directly replace "spam" with "schmetterling"
---

[...]

 

Exactly. (???)

 

So you both TOP and BOTTOM post. How retarded.

 

Yes. BTW I notice that no one here appears to be a Monty Python fan :-(

cheers