RE: Fiat completes Chrysler Group takeover
Thursday 2nd January 2014
Fiat has today confirmed it is acquiring the remaining part of the Chrysler Group not under its control. The 41.4616 per cent currently owned by the Voluntary Employees' Beneficiary Association (VEBA) Trust is expected to be signed across on or before the 20th January.
Fiat completes Chrysler Group takeover
Remaining Chrysler equity interests to be acquired by Fiat USA
The deal is worth $3.65 billion (£2.21 billion), a figure comprised of $1.9 billion (£1.15 billion) in a 'special distribution payable by Chrysler Group to its members' and $1.75 billion (£1.06 billion) 'in cash purchase consideration' to the VEBA Trust.
John Elkann, Fiat Chairman, said of the deal: "I have been looking forward to this day from the very moment that we were chosen to assist in the rebuilding of a vibrant Chrysler back in 2009. The work, commitment and achievement I have witnessed... is exceptional, and I take this opportunity to officially welcome each and every one of the people in the Chrysler organisation to the integrated Fiat-Chrysler world".
Sergio Marchionne added: "I will be forever grateful to the leadership team for the support and unwavering dedication shown to the integration project that today has taken its final shape. The unified ownership structure will now allow us to fully execute our vision of creating a global automaker that is truly unique in terms of mix of experience, perspective and know-how."
So what does this mean for the future of Fiat and Chrysler? Of course there has already been plentiful part sharing and badge swapping between the two (Lancia/Chrysler Ypsilon anyone?) so expect that to continue with even closer integration now. With the whole Chrysler brand under Fiat, could one entirely new global model be in prospect with different badges?
View the full Fiat press release here
Discussion
Glad they've badged the gopping heaps of s
t "Chrysler" over here and not Lancia, further ruining any credibility that Lancia had left
Honestly, Fiat really could have done something decent with Lancia rather than bolt ugly bodies to mediocre fiat platforms and flog them as supposedly luxurious cars. I guess the trouble Fiat had was that Lancia and Alfa Romeo were too similar in that they are both sporty, high end Italian brands
t "Chrysler" over here and not Lancia, further ruining any credibility that Lancia had left Honestly, Fiat really could have done something decent with Lancia rather than bolt ugly bodies to mediocre fiat platforms and flog them as supposedly luxurious cars. I guess the trouble Fiat had was that Lancia and Alfa Romeo were too similar in that they are both sporty, high end Italian brands
It's very good news indeed for Alfa fans, but the group now needs to deliver.
I've been following this for several years now. This is ostensibly what's been holding back the next generation of Alfas, and to a lesser extent, the next generation of Chrysler group products. Sometimes it's been an excuse for not getting on with things, but the lack of progress is understandable to a fair extent.
I don't know how Marchionne has pulled it off but he's got a very good deal.
Watch out for another 'five year plan' concerning Alfa in Q1 this year; this time hopefully with a lot of uncertainty out of the way.
I've been following this for several years now. This is ostensibly what's been holding back the next generation of Alfas, and to a lesser extent, the next generation of Chrysler group products. Sometimes it's been an excuse for not getting on with things, but the lack of progress is understandable to a fair extent.
I don't know how Marchionne has pulled it off but he's got a very good deal.
Watch out for another 'five year plan' concerning Alfa in Q1 this year; this time hopefully with a lot of uncertainty out of the way.
I'm an American. With that out of the way, how drunk was Sergio Marchionne when he thought that buying Chrysler was ever a good idea? Has he not learned from everyone else who has made the same mistake? I'm guessing the main purpose of this is to basically purchase the sales channel in the United States for use by Fiat and Alfa Romeo? I sincerely doubt that Sergio has real plans for the Chrysler and Dodge franchises, and this is a means to an end to get more Italian cars over here.
On top, over here we can now listen to people justifying their purchase of a Dodge Avenger with, "Bro, it's like, made by the same people who make Ferrari!"
For the record, those aren't actual chrome wheels (which are gaudy as it is). That is a chrome plastic shell that goes over an unfinished steel wheel, making it even heavier than a steel wheel. When people curb their car when parallel parking, odds are good the shell breaks or comes off.
On top, over here we can now listen to people justifying their purchase of a Dodge Avenger with, "Bro, it's like, made by the same people who make Ferrari!"
For the record, those aren't actual chrome wheels (which are gaudy as it is). That is a chrome plastic shell that goes over an unfinished steel wheel, making it even heavier than a steel wheel. When people curb their car when parallel parking, odds are good the shell breaks or comes off.
Edited by Goofnik on Thursday 2nd January 15:18
Goofnik said:
I'm an American. With that out of the way, how drunk was Sergio Marchionne when he thought that buying Chrysler was ever a good idea? Has he not learned from everyone else who has made the same mistake? I'm guessing the main purpose of this is to basically purchase the sales channel in the United States for use by Fiat and Alfa Romeo? I sincerely doubt that Sergio has real plans for the Chrysler and Dodge franchises, and this is a means to an end to get more italian cars over here.
Couldn't be more wrong. Fiat have owned the majority stake in Chrysler since 2009, and Chrysler's US stability saved Fiat from going bust in the ongoing economic eurodoom, so it's already proven to be an ingenious move.Yes, it's a beachhead for Fiat & Alfa in America, which was never possible before, but it's also much more than that. For starters, something has to be done to fix Chrysler's increasingly ancient lineup, and Fiat is the answer to that (e.g. the Dodge Dart = Alfa Giulietta). I've got to go else I would expand on this a little more, maybe later.
I can never understand business, that out of the way this deal is more baffling to me than most;
Fiat in the guise of Alfa Romeo make what I can only describe as automotive art (the great masters not Andy Warhol)heck, even the Fiat 500 isn't that bad looking, but when it comes to Chrysler OH DEAR oh dear. I can't think of any Chrysler built car
that I like, if this merger means that the new company shares everything in an effort to make it a global brand then I can see it being renamed 'chry-fiat in Europe, there are probably at this moment dozens of Fiat dealers thinking of trying to claim benefits from this government as it will be easier than trying to sell re-badged Chrysler rubbish, you could never call the sales of the re-badged models a success a complete and utter failure would be too kind.
As I said before I am not a business person, I am the type of person who would buy the product not make/design or plan it in any way and therein lies the problem, convincing enough people to make the 'marriage' a success.
Fiat in the guise of Alfa Romeo make what I can only describe as automotive art (the great masters not Andy Warhol)heck, even the Fiat 500 isn't that bad looking, but when it comes to Chrysler OH DEAR oh dear. I can't think of any Chrysler built car
that I like, if this merger means that the new company shares everything in an effort to make it a global brand then I can see it being renamed 'chry-fiat in Europe, there are probably at this moment dozens of Fiat dealers thinking of trying to claim benefits from this government as it will be easier than trying to sell re-badged Chrysler rubbish, you could never call the sales of the re-badged models a success a complete and utter failure would be too kind.
As I said before I am not a business person, I am the type of person who would buy the product not make/design or plan it in any way and therein lies the problem, convincing enough people to make the 'marriage' a success.
trashbat said:
ouldn't be more wrong. Fiat have owned the majority stake in Chrysler since 2009, and Chrysler's US stability saved Fiat from going bust in the ongoing economic eurodoom, so it's already proven to be an ingenious move.
Yes, it's a beachhead for Fiat & Alfa in America, which was never possible before, but it's also much more than that. For starters, something has to be done to fix Chrysler's increasingly ancient lineup, and Fiat is the answer to that (e.g. the Dodge Dart = Alfa Giulietta). I've got to go else I would expand on this a little more, maybe later.
Chrysler's increasingly ancient lineup isn't a recent phenomenon. You could've said that in the mid-1990s or mid-2000s and it would still ring true.Yes, it's a beachhead for Fiat & Alfa in America, which was never possible before, but it's also much more than that. For starters, something has to be done to fix Chrysler's increasingly ancient lineup, and Fiat is the answer to that (e.g. the Dodge Dart = Alfa Giulietta). I've got to go else I would expand on this a little more, maybe later.
Chrysler/Dodge has always been an "also-ran" in the States, and with good reason. They rarely seem to ever have the money to do *anything* proper. They had a good packaging concept in the Dodge Caliber, but the interior plastics were the quality of imitation Lego. The 300C with the large Hemi V8s wasn't a bad idea, and had some fresh styling, but glass transmissions and a sea of grey plastic made it feel as luxurious as a 15-year old Toyota Avalon. They have some clever interior packaging, but the low-quality materials, terrible NVH (Pentastar V6, I'm looking at you), comparatively dated power trains (which for a long while, were old Mitsubishi power trains which were still better than the Chrysler ones), below average reliability, and phoned-in styling have been brand hallmarks for nearly 20 years. In the US, buying a Dodge or Chrysler makes little more sense than buying a Mitsubishi, unless your primary motivation is getting a new car for as cheap as possible (after incentives).
The Jeep brand is a different story altogether, but Chrysler/Dodge in specific have been phoning it in for nearly as long as I can remember. Saving Dodge/Chrysler is a lot like trying to save Rover. It's too far gone. I think $4B is a good way to buy directly into their large franchise network and assembly plants, but that's about it.
Edited by Goofnik on Thursday 2nd January 15:39
Well it is all smiles here. There is only one way forward for small car companies be so small you have a niche or join a large manufacturer. For medium sized comapnies like Fiat only one way forward grow and get into volume markets one way or the other. For Fiat to build factories, increas their range, develop new tech and enter a new market is just too big an investment. Fiat needs to seel more cars, share platforms and enter a market where it could enjoy significant growth. Given western experience in China then moving into the US is a good idea. It owns Lancia, Alfa and Ferrari. Now it has sales and production available in the US.
Who wants to see Fiat go bust? No one. So what else would they have done?
Sold themselves to VW?
Who wants to see Fiat go bust? No one. So what else would they have done?
Sold themselves to VW?
williamp said:
It would be interesting to see if they succeed where Mercedes failed.
I've heard opinions that Merc actually almost killed Chrysler during their 'partnership', due to fact that while LH based cars were success for Chrysler in 90s, Merc failed to help to create proper replacement for them and just tried to milk the brand.Don;t know how true it is.
Edited by Denorth on Thursday 2nd January 16:23
Denorth said:
williamp said:
It would be interesting to see if they succeed where Mercedes failed.
I've heard opinions that Merc actually almost killed Chrysler during their 'partnership', due to fact that while LH based cars were success for Chrysler in 0s, Merc failed to help to create proper replacement for them and just tried to milk the brand.Don;t know how true it is.
Merger happened in 98 but Merc dropped quality from 94/95
Goofnik said:
Chrysler's increasingly ancient lineup isn't a recent phenomenon. You could've said that in the mid-1990s or mid-2000s and it would still ring true.
Chrysler/Dodge has always been an "also-ran" in the States, and with good reason. They rarely seem to ever have the money to do *anything* proper. They had a good packaging concept in the Dodge Caliber, but the interior plastics were the quality of imitation Lego. The 300C with the large Hemi V8s wasn't a bad idea, and had some fresh styling, but glass transmissions and a sea of grey plastic made it feel as luxurious as a 15-year old Toyota Avalon. They have some clever interior packaging, but the low-quality materials, terrible NVH (Pentastar V6, I'm looking at you), comparatively dated power trains (which for a long while, were old Mitsubishi power trains which were still better than the Chrysler ones), below average reliability, and phoned-in styling have been brand hallmarks for nearly 20 years. In the US, buying a Dodge or Chrysler makes little more sense than buying a Mitsubishi, unless your primary motivation is getting a new car for as cheap as possible (after incentives).
The Jeep brand is a different story altogether, but Chrysler/Dodge in specific have been phoning it in for nearly as long as I can remember. Saving Dodge/Chrysler is a lot like trying to save Rover. It's too far gone. I think $4B is a good way to buy directly into their large franchise network and assembly plants, but that's about it.
It's a fair assessment but there's a lot more going on too. I don't know what you know about Fiat and Alfa, but they're currently stuck primarily making A and B segment cars. You can't build C and D segment cars like the Alfa 159 (platform borrowed from GM) when you've only got one brand (Alfa) and sometimes one market (EMEA) to sell them in, because you don't even cover your costs.Chrysler/Dodge has always been an "also-ran" in the States, and with good reason. They rarely seem to ever have the money to do *anything* proper. They had a good packaging concept in the Dodge Caliber, but the interior plastics were the quality of imitation Lego. The 300C with the large Hemi V8s wasn't a bad idea, and had some fresh styling, but glass transmissions and a sea of grey plastic made it feel as luxurious as a 15-year old Toyota Avalon. They have some clever interior packaging, but the low-quality materials, terrible NVH (Pentastar V6, I'm looking at you), comparatively dated power trains (which for a long while, were old Mitsubishi power trains which were still better than the Chrysler ones), below average reliability, and phoned-in styling have been brand hallmarks for nearly 20 years. In the US, buying a Dodge or Chrysler makes little more sense than buying a Mitsubishi, unless your primary motivation is getting a new car for as cheap as possible (after incentives).
The Jeep brand is a different story altogether, but Chrysler/Dodge in specific have been phoning it in for nearly as long as I can remember. Saving Dodge/Chrysler is a lot like trying to save Rover. It's too far gone. I think $4B is a good way to buy directly into their large franchise network and assembly plants, but that's about it.
Edited by Goofnik on Thursday 2nd January 15:39
Modern car manufacturing is all about platform sharing and spreading development costs. Chrysler and their other brands is how Fiat are going to achieve that, so now you can make a big Alfa because it'll be reused as a big Chrysler, big Dodge, small Maserati etc.
So far the Chrysler turnaround seems to be working. The European element has been slow and disappointing to date, but with this merger out of the way, we'll see what happens.
As for Daimler-Chrysler, I think that was a case study of how not to do corporate management, but I'll have to search to find some relevant material.
trashbat said:
It's a fair assessment but there's a lot more going on too. I don't know what you know about Fiat and Alfa, but they're currently stuck primarily making A and B segment cars. You can't build C and D segment cars like the Alfa 159 (platform borrowed from GM) when you've only got one brand (Alfa) and sometimes one market (EMEA) to sell them in, because you don't even cover your costs.
Modern car manufacturing is all about platform sharing and spreading development costs. Chrysler and their other brands is how Fiat are going to achieve that, so now you can make a big Alfa because it'll be reused as a big Chrysler, big Dodge, small Maserati etc.
I agree in principle, but there's not much for the taking. Chrysler is two platforms -- the Mitsubishi GS/Chrysler JS, and the Chrysler L (LX/LD/LC). Both platforms require quite a lot of money to be thrown at them to be competitive, the L requiring less money than the GS to punch above its weight class. It can be done, but I don't think it can be done in a cost-competitive manner, especially if you're thinking of Alfa attempting to take on the Germans luxury marques at their own game with compact and mid-size luxury/sport sedans.Modern car manufacturing is all about platform sharing and spreading development costs. Chrysler and their other brands is how Fiat are going to achieve that, so now you can make a big Alfa because it'll be reused as a big Chrysler, big Dodge, small Maserati etc.
Well, you can add to that 'Compact Wide', which is what underpins the Dodge Dart; primarily a Fiat bit of work stemming from the Giulietta, but wouldn't exist without Chrysler.
I don't worry too much about the specifics of what legacy Chrysler stuff exists today; it's about opportunity and access to market. I don't know what if anything they'll do with the old platforms, many of which come from the Mercedes era, but I'm not sure it really matters.
Part of a Chrysler platform made it into the new Maserati QP, but not without such reworking that it's not very meaningful any more.
I don't worry too much about the specifics of what legacy Chrysler stuff exists today; it's about opportunity and access to market. I don't know what if anything they'll do with the old platforms, many of which come from the Mercedes era, but I'm not sure it really matters.
Part of a Chrysler platform made it into the new Maserati QP, but not without such reworking that it's not very meaningful any more.
The available evidence, across all industries, is that about half of all mergers/takeovers succeed. The other half fail. In the automotive industry the success rate seems to be even lower than that! Wish them good luck. They need it.
My guess is that Fiat hope to get the benefit of consolidating the total profits generated by the Jeep and Dodge truck brands plus access to US distribution for Alfas by achieving 100% control. Nor would it surprise me if they started to build some Jeep models, such as the Cherokee, in Italy for the European market.
My guess is that Fiat hope to get the benefit of consolidating the total profits generated by the Jeep and Dodge truck brands plus access to US distribution for Alfas by achieving 100% control. Nor would it surprise me if they started to build some Jeep models, such as the Cherokee, in Italy for the European market.
radio man said:
I can never understand business, that out of the way this deal is more baffling to me than most;
Fiat in the guise of Alfa Romeo make what I can only describe as automotive art (the great masters not Andy Warhol)heck, even the Fiat 500 isn't that bad looking, but when it comes to Chrysler OH DEAR oh dear. I can't think of any Chrysler built car
that I like, if this merger means that the new company shares everything in an effort to make it a global brand then I can see it being renamed 'chry-fiat in Europe, there are probably at this moment dozens of Fiat dealers thinking of trying to claim benefits from this government as it will be easier than trying to sell re-badged Chrysler rubbish, you could never call the sales of the re-badged models a success a complete and utter failure would be too kind.
As I said before I am not a business person, I am the type of person who would buy the product not make/design or plan it in any way and therein lies the problem, convincing enough people to make the 'marriage' a success.
Decent looking cars under Chrysler - 300C, Dodge Challenger, Dodge ChargerFiat in the guise of Alfa Romeo make what I can only describe as automotive art (the great masters not Andy Warhol)heck, even the Fiat 500 isn't that bad looking, but when it comes to Chrysler OH DEAR oh dear. I can't think of any Chrysler built car
that I like, if this merger means that the new company shares everything in an effort to make it a global brand then I can see it being renamed 'chry-fiat in Europe, there are probably at this moment dozens of Fiat dealers thinking of trying to claim benefits from this government as it will be easier than trying to sell re-badged Chrysler rubbish, you could never call the sales of the re-badged models a success a complete and utter failure would be too kind.
As I said before I am not a business person, I am the type of person who would buy the product not make/design or plan it in any way and therein lies the problem, convincing enough people to make the 'marriage' a success.
Gassing Station | Motoring News | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff