In a message dated 1/3/99 10:10:18 AM Eastern Standard Time, klaus@buffnet.net
writes:
<< 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. >>
Klaus, I dont know where to start!! So here goes.
Yes, Daimler Benz did exist after the merger for about 1 month. Read your
stock reports. Their was a law suit by some of the DB shareholders which by
German law held DB into the corp. for a while after the merger.
>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.
Klaus this is correct however I think Jon did say "as far as automobiles go"
>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.
Well, I doubt that will happen. Are you aware how DB rewards their
executive officers? Prior to the merger Herr Schremp recieved cars, houses
and properties. He now also gets stock options and his pay rate has
increased. The top German execs that are coming to Auburn Hills have a moving
expense of 600,000 dollars, not dm! That is only for a new home! Not
including actuall moving expenses ie.. funiture, autos etc.
>
>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.
Nope, not taken out of context at all. We will be working hand in hand
with the Benz folks on a lot of q.c. issues, however they wont be implementing
that into our vehicles, that will be up to us. In fact, in a town hall
meeting we had after the announcement of the takeover, Mr Stallkamp told us
exactly that. So if it was taken out of context, maybe you should take that
up with him! Any quality control issues has been and will be up to CC.
You are right, Neon, Ram and Dakota does not have the quality of an S
class, and thats the point! Do you really want to spend 22000 on a neon, or
30 for a standard cab Ram? How bout 33 for a CC Dak R/T? Lets leave that to
the folks at Lincoln with their Blackwood! Hey, here's an idea! Maybe the
Benz arm of DC will make their version of our trucks! Then you can spend that
kind of money for a perfect work vehicle! But why? I have no problems with
the quality of my CC vehicles. True, its not perfect but I did only pay 12
grand for my 95 dak!
>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.
Believe me buddy, these are not rumors nor are they half truths. That was
the intention of the future market for Viper along with the current market.
Make no mistake about it.
>The web site appears to be authored by someone who is ignorant or they are
>putting this up for grins.
Hmm ignorant? It's hard to be ignorant when you are an engineer for
Chrysler don't you think? As far as grins, I dont think that applies either,
atleast not anymore than these latest posts! =0)
Eric
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 12:11:51 EDT