well said
they screwed chrysler over

↓↑report

If you are american, you are seriously kidding about inviting uneducated unskilled mexic... uh, i mean immigrants. And if the american car industry is all so powerful, why is it having its ass kicked by the japanese on home soil? Why was it that Daimler bought chrysler and not the other way around, if chrysler was swimming in money? Why did their shareholders agree to the deal in the first place? How come this dumbass european company called daimler AG has a net income of 9 billion Euro (13.9 bn usd, so don't feel bad about daimler losing money on the deal.) and GM has a net income of -39 bn USD? And thats a company thats on the verge of turnaround, so imagine whats going on at chrysler? It is actually obvious that this situation is a result of the 2 bn usd that GM had to pay FIAT 5 years ago to get out of that joint venture, just dont ask how 2 bn became 39 bn... Fiat was on the verge of bakrupcy and is now making a net income of 2 bn Euros a year, while GM europe (opel) had to struggle keeping its factories in germany open. I guess europe has no clue about cars.

↓↑report

Val, perhaps in your statement you want to group things together or otherwise you get a stew of facts, fiction and other right and not-so-right things.

The discussion, as you might have noticed, is about Diamler getting pinched again by its marvelous purchase of Chrysler. There are no discussions on the overall IQ of GM management vs. that of the European maker. Losing $30 billion dollars only because you put your ego before your business is not the smartest thing one can do.

↓↑report

You are right that it is not very organized or anything, and the argument is not europe vs us, but words like "go europe" and the "french immigrants" are exactly as relevant to the topic as are my babblings (i.e. they are totally irrelevant). This was a comment no a comment, not so much on the article, which is kind of retarded, but hey, it's the internet after all, this is to be expected. Oh, and where in my post did i just make things up just to prove a "point"?

↓↑report

sorry, i meant europe vs GM management, not USA in general.

↓↑report

You didn't. The loss GM incurred was due to the changes in accounting practices, encompassing changes in tax benefits for many years, so it does not a true representation of performance of the company.

My point is the only reason why D-C collapsed was the ego problem - on every level Daimler felt superior to Chrysler and instead of sharing ideas it spent all its time on treating Chrysler as its worst enemy. You might want to do it to your competitor, but to the partner with whom you are financially linked? Plain stupid.

↓↑report

People are not stupid, especially those who are interested in reading financial statements. It will not take an accounting genius to differentiate losses from minor stake in other companies vs. losses/gains from selling cars.

↓↑report

"Cash is fact," says Chrysler LLC product guru Jim Press, "and profit is fiction.
Interesting aphorism coming from a guy whose privately held company is obliged to disclose neither to the public. But in a town that for decades has measured success by the market share its automakers claim and the profits they book with accounting gimmicks -- instead of actual cash generated -- the former Toyota Motor Corp. exec has it exactly right.

↓↑report

Nissan and Cherry you both should get out while you are both ahead. Learn from Daimler's biggest investment blunder.

↓↑report

Sorry, but Chrysler's current state is the _result_ of Mercedes' mismanagement, not despite it. They may not have been high-flying before, but the post-DCX trainwreck is particularly telling.

Products in the pipe before the merger:
* 300M, Intrepid, Concorde
* 300C, Magnum (Mercedes supplied only suspension and transmission; the design and concept was all Chrysler)
* PT
* Caravan
* Wrangler
* Viper
* Ram
* old Sebring, Avenger
* Dakota

Products from the early stages of the merger (mostly Chrysler, with some input from Merc)
* Neon SRT
* Charger
* Liberty
* Durango

Products directly developed under Merc's direction:
* Crossfire
* Compass, Patriot
* Challenger
* Commander
* new Sebring, Avenger
* Caliber
* Nitro
* Aspen
* new Viper
* Sprinter
* new Wrangler (incl four-door)
* new Caravan/T&C

I think you get the idea. Mercedes took a decent--if occasionally uninspiring--lineup and thoroughly trashed it. Other than the vans, Viper, Wrangler and Sprinter, everything Mercedes shepherded was a mistake. And you'd really have to try hard to screw up the four that weren't, so I don't exactly give them credit.

I don't think it was malice, though, as Merc was screwing up their own model line (A, R, ML) at the same time. The problem is that Chrysler doesn't have the immunity that Mercedes' badge appeal affords and suffered much more.

↓↑report

I'd have to agree with psarhjinian. Of course it's not like anyone ever accused MB of making good cars any time in the last 20 years.

↓↑report