return to story
Iacocca: "Daimler Screwed Chrysler"
All Reader Comments
page 3 of 11
Chris
May 21, 2007 2:49 AM GMT
Great, that's all we need for Chrysler, more of the same old fashioned, old school, old thinking and just plain old leadership! The inability to adapt to new market conditions like higher gas prices, fickle American taste or safety standards is the reason Chrysler and the big three are in trouble. All this was predictable and most experts knew these changes would come. This really makes a person wonder what kind of leadership is leading the big three, and here we have an icon of the industry (Lacocca) saying he wants those same people to keep running Chrysler. Please.
Link to this comment
Ole Turana
May 20, 2007 9:33 AM GMT
The age of taking care of workers is long gone and it's time US auto makers ditched this nanny state of affairs and focused on the ball. Mention them - GM, Ford - they are all tagging along with baggage they hardly need if they have to take on their lean and efficient competitors from Asia.
Link to this comment
Lee
May 20, 2007 6:18 AM GMT
The only problem is, it ain't true. One needs only to look at the new #1 auto manufacturer, Toyota, to find a brilliant example of how high-end and mass-market brands can create synergies not possible with a company that serves only one of those markets. At the same time Daimler was refusing to let a Dodge share a platform or drivetrain with a Mercedes C-Class, Lexus had great success selling ES sedans and RX utility vehicles that were powered by the identical engines and transmissions found in a plebian Toyota Camry, and built all of those vehicles (and several others) on the same basic platform. Not only did this result in slashed manufacturing costs, but it helped make the Camry the nation's most popular car, in part because the basic mechanical package was engineered to luxury-car standards. Meanwhile at Lexus, the use of mass-produced Toyota drivetrains and platforms gave Lexus higher profit margins than their Mercedes counterparts could hope for.
Link to this comment
Lee
May 20, 2007 6:15 AM GMT
I'm not sure Daimler's buyout of Chrysler "was a disaster from the start", but there's no doubt that Daimler bungled any opportunity to make the merger/acquisition work. As I see it, there are two primary reasons DaimlerChrysler failed: One of course was the high pension/legacy costs that Daimler ignored the scope of when they bought Chrysler. The other, which amazingly hasn't been given much mention in recent DCX postmortems, was Daimler's reluctance to allow Mercedes and Chrysler vehicles to share platforms and parts. At first, they refused to allow Mercedes mechanical bits into Chryslers at all; then, they only allowed discarded, previous-generation Benz platforms to live a second life in a Chrysler body. As late as last week, DCX execs cited the lack of synergies possible between a mass-market American manufacturer and a premium German automaker as a reason why Chrysler had to be dumped.
Link to this comment
Mike Cobb
May 20, 2007 4:55 AM GMT
It is a sad day in the automotive industry when a financial equity firm acquires a U.S. auto manufacture. However, the Big Three have done it to themselves by building and selling junk to the American market. The Big Three have been doing it for decades and their time has come. They have ignored and laughed at the Japanese manufacturers too long, and now look who is laughing ... all the way to the bank. Daimler's move was strategic, to open facilities in the U.S. market. Daimler's objectives has been met, and now it is time to trim the fat.
Link to this comment
Dennis
May 20, 2007 4:43 AM GMT
In response to the post from "Bob": Neither the U.S. government, nor any U.S. taxpayer, ever paid a dime to "fix" Chrysler. The government merely guaranteed the loans to keep the company afloat! And the government made a premium when the loans were paid back SEVEN YEARS EARLY! Maybe you should have read Lee Iacocca's first book where he explains in detail what took place. What Chrysler needs now is a leader like Lee Iacocca. Let's hope Cerberus finds one!
Link to this comment
Jeff Rutherford
May 19, 2007 7:06 PM GMT
Iacocca says Daimler drove Chrysler off a cliff. Well I don't know if that's true or not. The problem with Chrysler's products is that they seem to have focused only on how to bend sheet metal into cool shapes (focusing on impulse buyers), but they haven't given a hoot about improving reliability and fuel efficiency (focusing on smart consumer values). Is that Daimler's fault?
Link to this comment
Paul
May 19, 2007 5:58 PM GMT
Lee, I am a great admirer of what you achieved at Ford & Chrysler during your tenure. However I disagree with your views on Daimler. I believe Chrysler's problems (as well as Ford and GM) in the fact that their product mix is totally wrong. The consumer has changed from that of the early 90's. Today's consumer has a conscience and wants to have a positive impact on the environment they live in. If Chrysler is to succeed in a global market (irrespective of who owns it), then they need to improve the quality of their vehicles, improve the quality of their produce substantially, lower overheads, improve margins, and build trully global cars. Only then will Chrysler be able to compete on a global front.
Link to this comment
don zuchowski
May 19, 2007 1:49 PM GMT
I think Lee Iacocca should be brought back as chairmen and CEO and given total authority to do what is needed. Also why are people saying that Chrysler will be a private company? It will not be a private company since Daimler AG will own 19.9 percent of the new company and if memory serves me Daimler AG is a public company... So how is Chrysler a private company when one of its owners is a public company, Daimler will have to report earnings on what companies that Daimler owns, which includes Chrysler Holdings LLC...
Link to this comment
Rick Pedraza
May 19, 2007 11:19 AM GMT
Dear Mr. Iacocca, I find your words so very encouraging! I have been around Chrysler/Dodge products all my life. I think you could take it further and say that Chrysler made Daimler a better company. Those Benz cars were DOG UGLY before MOPAR came around! These hideous imports are no match for the sheer American appeal the Chrysler has today. Better days are ahead!
Link to this comment
return to story
Iacocca: "Daimler Screwed Chrysler"
All Reader Comments
page 3 of 11
Chris May 21, 2007 2:49 AM GMT Great, that's all we need for Chrysler, more of the same old fashioned, old school, old thinking and just plain old leadership! The inability to adapt to new market conditions like higher gas prices, fickle American taste or safety standards is the reason Chrysler and the big three are in trouble. All this was predictable and most experts knew these changes would come. This really makes a person wonder what kind of leadership is leading the big three, and here we have an icon of the industry (Lacocca) saying he wants those same people to keep running Chrysler. Please.
Link to this comment
Ole Turana May 20, 2007 9:33 AM GMT The age of taking care of workers is long gone and it's time US auto makers ditched this nanny state of affairs and focused on the ball. Mention them - GM, Ford - they are all tagging along with baggage they hardly need if they have to take on their lean and efficient competitors from Asia.
Link to this comment
Lee May 20, 2007 6:18 AM GMT The only problem is, it ain't true. One needs only to look at the new #1 auto manufacturer, Toyota, to find a brilliant example of how high-end and mass-market brands can create synergies not possible with a company that serves only one of those markets. At the same time Daimler was refusing to let a Dodge share a platform or drivetrain with a Mercedes C-Class, Lexus had great success selling ES sedans and RX utility vehicles that were powered by the identical engines and transmissions found in a plebian Toyota Camry, and built all of those vehicles (and several others) on the same basic platform. Not only did this result in slashed manufacturing costs, but it helped make the Camry the nation's most popular car, in part because the basic mechanical package was engineered to luxury-car standards. Meanwhile at Lexus, the use of mass-produced Toyota drivetrains and platforms gave Lexus higher profit margins than their Mercedes counterparts could hope for.
Link to this comment
Lee May 20, 2007 6:15 AM GMT I'm not sure Daimler's buyout of Chrysler "was a disaster from the start", but there's no doubt that Daimler bungled any opportunity to make the merger/acquisition work. As I see it, there are two primary reasons DaimlerChrysler failed: One of course was the high pension/legacy costs that Daimler ignored the scope of when they bought Chrysler. The other, which amazingly hasn't been given much mention in recent DCX postmortems, was Daimler's reluctance to allow Mercedes and Chrysler vehicles to share platforms and parts. At first, they refused to allow Mercedes mechanical bits into Chryslers at all; then, they only allowed discarded, previous-generation Benz platforms to live a second life in a Chrysler body. As late as last week, DCX execs cited the lack of synergies possible between a mass-market American manufacturer and a premium German automaker as a reason why Chrysler had to be dumped.
Link to this comment
Mike Cobb May 20, 2007 4:55 AM GMT It is a sad day in the automotive industry when a financial equity firm acquires a U.S. auto manufacture. However, the Big Three have done it to themselves by building and selling junk to the American market. The Big Three have been doing it for decades and their time has come. They have ignored and laughed at the Japanese manufacturers too long, and now look who is laughing ... all the way to the bank. Daimler's move was strategic, to open facilities in the U.S. market. Daimler's objectives has been met, and now it is time to trim the fat.
Link to this comment
Dennis May 20, 2007 4:43 AM GMT In response to the post from "Bob": Neither the U.S. government, nor any U.S. taxpayer, ever paid a dime to "fix" Chrysler. The government merely guaranteed the loans to keep the company afloat! And the government made a premium when the loans were paid back SEVEN YEARS EARLY! Maybe you should have read Lee Iacocca's first book where he explains in detail what took place. What Chrysler needs now is a leader like Lee Iacocca. Let's hope Cerberus finds one!
Link to this comment
Jeff Rutherford May 19, 2007 7:06 PM GMT Iacocca says Daimler drove Chrysler off a cliff. Well I don't know if that's true or not. The problem with Chrysler's products is that they seem to have focused only on how to bend sheet metal into cool shapes (focusing on impulse buyers), but they haven't given a hoot about improving reliability and fuel efficiency (focusing on smart consumer values). Is that Daimler's fault?
Link to this comment
Paul May 19, 2007 5:58 PM GMT Lee, I am a great admirer of what you achieved at Ford & Chrysler during your tenure. However I disagree with your views on Daimler. I believe Chrysler's problems (as well as Ford and GM) in the fact that their product mix is totally wrong. The consumer has changed from that of the early 90's. Today's consumer has a conscience and wants to have a positive impact on the environment they live in. If Chrysler is to succeed in a global market (irrespective of who owns it), then they need to improve the quality of their vehicles, improve the quality of their produce substantially, lower overheads, improve margins, and build trully global cars. Only then will Chrysler be able to compete on a global front.
Link to this comment
don zuchowski May 19, 2007 1:49 PM GMT I think Lee Iacocca should be brought back as chairmen and CEO and given total authority to do what is needed. Also why are people saying that Chrysler will be a private company? It will not be a private company since Daimler AG will own 19.9 percent of the new company and if memory serves me Daimler AG is a public company... So how is Chrysler a private company when one of its owners is a public company, Daimler will have to report earnings on what companies that Daimler owns, which includes Chrysler Holdings LLC...
Link to this comment
Rick Pedraza May 19, 2007 11:19 AM GMT Dear Mr. Iacocca, I find your words so very encouraging! I have been around Chrysler/Dodge products all my life. I think you could take it further and say that Chrysler made Daimler a better company. Those Benz cars were DOG UGLY before MOPAR came around! These hideous imports are no match for the sheer American appeal the Chrysler has today. Better days are ahead!
Link to this comment
Post your own comment about this story…