-----Original Message-----
From: Jon Steiger <stei0302@cs.fredonia.edu>
To: dakota-truck@buffnet.net <dakota-truck@buffnet.net>
Date: Saturday, January 02, 1999 7:26 PM
Subject: Re: DML: RE: DaimlerChrysler takeover site
(Note: the info I give here in this post is from the
http://www.flash.net/~bigmopar/ web site. Craig B. has
already mentioned that the author didn't want to disclose his
sources for much of the info, but other stuff is from quotes
from executives, sales reports, etc. so at least some of this
is fact.)
>That's what is so depressing about the site... I spent quite some time
>reading through it all and there were quite a few troubling things about
>it. The first is that it is actually a takeover, and not a merger.
Wrong! The information given on the site is incorrect. Diamler Benz no
longer exists just like Chrysler Corporation no longer exists. In fact the
dropping of the Benz name from the corporation was a major road block with
the former D-B stock holders.
>Daimler
>is pulling the strings; they bought Chrysler. Another thing is that
Chrysler
>was actually much bigger than Daimler! (As far as automobiles go.) If I
>remember right, DB was 15th and Chrysler was 5th.
Another case of selective facts. Certainly Chrysler sold more cars than DB.
DB sells LUXURY cars starting at prices which exceed $30K. DB is larger than
Chrysler, it is a very, very large industrial corporation and is the largest
producer of large trucks in the world.
Chrysler sales outside of North America are anemic, even in the last few
years. One of the main reasons Ford and GM weathered the automotive
downturns in North America much better than Chrysler was their strong
European presence, which Chrysler has very little of.
>DB sold cars in
>something like
>55 countries, and Chrysler had something like 160 countries. According to
>the web
>site, it was D-B who needed Chrysler, and not the other way around.
I would veture to say either the numbers are reversed or they're counting
single vehicle sales in 3rd world countries. Either way it is a
misrepresentation of the facts. Mercedes-Benz is the most recognized
automoive name wold wide. Period.
>Chrysler
>execs stood to make a lot of money from the merger, so who knows where
>?their loyalty was?
True to form for all American corporations, This is where DB will definitely
help. Stop raiding the piggy bank for personal gains.
>Schremp was quoted as saying that Chrysler cars wouldn't
>be sold in Mercedes-Benz dealerships,
Very True! Chrysler and Mercedes cars appeal to totaly different market
segments and again this is a very strong point for the merger.
>and the MB quality control wouldn't
>be applied to Chrysler vehicles, so that doesn't help out Chrysler
>either...
I have a hard time believing this one...Sounds like a statement taken out of
context. Herr Schremp was more than likely saying Chrysler would not compete
at the quality levels that Mercedes-Benz targets. Face it a Neon or Ram or
Dakota does not have the craftsmanship of a 600 Benz.
>Then there was the misleading stockholder report where all DB
>numbers
>were reported in billions of DM and all CC numbers were reported in
millions of
>US dollars. (which made DB seem like this huge corporation when it is
>actually Chrysler who is the bigger (and better and more efficient) auto
>manufacturer).
Of course the DB sales are reported in DM, The company is German ! To think
that this would mislead the stock holders is ridiculous! It's very easy to
compare DM to $US. Your talking about investment professionals, Do you
really think Wall Street and Frankfurt would be mis lead this easily? Lets
go sell them the Peace Bridge!
>Can you think of a car company youŽd rather merge with?
>
>I canŽt.
>I can't either, but only because I don't think they should have merged
>with anyone... They were doing fine on their own. Bigger != better. The
>web site above mentioned that BMW would make a lot more sense to merge
>with. (There were several reasons, but a couple were better quality and
>less product line crossover.) There's some info on the site to the effect
>that the Viper was supposed to be completely redesigned this year to a
>mid-engined vehicle that would compete on the level of Ferarri and
>Lamborghini.
>That idea was killed right after the merger. There was also a chrysler
>vehicle in the works that would have competed directly with many of
Mercedes
>Benz's models, which was also killed with the merger. (Obviously,
>DC wouldn't want to compete with themselves, but the point was that CC
>didn't need DB to design vehicles of that caliber; they were already well
>on their way. But now they'll be restricted to just low cost, lower
>quality lines.)
This is absolute hogwash based on rumors and half truths. I'm sure Viper
will be redone in the future, but not to compete with Ferrari and Lambo. As
for Chrysler tring to compete with DB, the car is on the market already,
it's called 300M and was designed with the European market in mind. The car
was referred to internally as the 5 meter car, any cars longer than 5 meters
are heavily taxed in Europe.
>I dunno; check out the site and make your own judgements; if just a
>quarter of the things mentioned there are true, its still enough to make
>me very depressed. :-(
The web site appears to be authored by someone who is ignorant or they are
putting this up for grins. I was amused by teh way the author put Iaccoca on
such a high pedestal. Every Chrysler employee I know personally detests
Iaccoca. I recommend reading "Behind The Wheel at Chrysler" for a very good
insight into Iaccoca, Chrysler, and the Auto industry as it goes into the
21st century.
.--- stei0302@cs.fredonia.edu ------------------------------------.
| Affiliations: DoD, EAA, MP Race Team, NMA, SPA, USUA. RP-SEL |
| '96 Dodge Dakota v8 SLT CC (14.58@93.55), '96 Kolb FireFly 447 |
`----------------------- http://www.cs.fredonia.edu/~stei0302/ ---'
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 12:11:51 EDT