Fiat is well on its way toward owning 57 percent of Chrysler by the end of 2011, and CEO Sergio Marchionne appears to be ready to take the integration of the two companies to the next level. Bloomberg reports that Marchionne plans to unify the management structure of the two automakers, adding that a tie-up will happen "pretty quickly."

While Marchionne provided no timetable for such a move, one possible date to look out for is Fiat's July 26 earnings report. Marchionne's plan to unify management at the two automakers is the next step in a broader plan to reduce costs while contributing $140 billion in combined revenue by 2014. At this point, there are few products that are being shared between Fiat and Chrysler, though by 2014 there should be a lot more platform and powertrain commonality.

One unknown at this point is whether any top-level Chrysler or Fiat execs will be shown the door when the management unification plans become public. If the two companies are really going to combine, we're thinking that some overlap is likely to result in job cuts on both sides.


I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.


    • 1 Second Ago
  • 101 Comments
      Hazdaz
      • 3 Years Ago
      Good news. This is what Mercedes never did. They never accepted Chrysler as a real equal, and instead always considered them a 2nd-tier division. Fiat is doing the opposite. They are bringing Chrysler into the family which should mean tons of cross-Atlantic product sharing. Cars engineered here will probably end up in Europe. Cars designed in Italy will make it here.
        icerabbit
        • 3 Years Ago
        @Hazdaz
        Well that is/was just the thing: Imagine MB selling any rebadged Chrysler product in Europe ... that would be a complete nightmare ... on different accounts. As far as Chryslers being sold as Fiats ... it will probably work. Selling Fiats as rebadged Chryslers in the US? Good luck with that. I'm not buying one. I've lived in Europe too long to witness first and second hand some of Fiat's qualities, or better lack thereof. Things may have changed for the better, but I'm not ready to believe that.
          Hazdaz
          • 3 Years Ago
          @icerabbit
          Just because M-B and Chrysler are (or at least were) in 2 different market segments, doesn't mean that a M-B and Chrysler couldn't have worked. No one was trying to rebadge a Dodge Neon with a 3-pointed star on its hood and sell it in M-B dealerships. I am talking about that there was no synergy within the Diamler Chrysler organization at all. At the time Chrysler had some of the hottest designs out there - yeah, really!. Go look at old car magazines and they were easily one of the hottest companies in the car biz. Their quality was crap, but M-B never wanted to let go of any of their designing/manufacturing techniques to improve the brand. It was basically one company in name only. Chrysler could have helped M-B move a little down market (like they have been doing more recently with their Smart, A and B cars). Instead M-B didn't want anything to do with Chrysler's influence and also didn't want to help with any of Chrysler's higher-end models either. When they FINALLY relented, the result was some great product - namely the 300 and all the cars that came out of it. But that was too little too late.
          Saco Sacão
          • 3 Years Ago
          @icerabbit
          How's life in the 80's?
      Swagger
      • 3 Years Ago
      The cameraman was getting too close to Marchionne. One of his goons is reaching for a gun.
        PeriD
        • 3 Years Ago
        @Swagger
        yeah i just noticed that... he and his transitions glasses are not amused
      Jim
      • 3 Years Ago
      I worked at a chrysler facility in Indiana when Daimler came into the picture. At this point in time Chrysler had been doing very well after the great turn around headed by Lee Iacoca. Profits were at a high, wages were good and were stable. We were actually seeing profit sharing checks. The company was turning a profit, business was well. Within a year after Daimler's involvement, Chrysler was operating at a loss. On top of that, major facilities were shutting down. Collective bargaining agreements were off the table, most of us were shoved into retirement early, or relocation to MAYBE have a job at one of the other plants. Then, all new hires started at a reduced- greatly reduced- rate with few if any benefits. Anymore, I compare them to a Yugo. Sure, some are pretty. But, put lipstick on a pig, all you have is a pretty pig. Wouldn't drive another to save my soul.
      Ron & Dolores
      • 3 Years Ago
      I worked for chrysler for 31 years and beleive me the people who worked there tried there best to make a quality car, it was the management who took chrysler down, Most plant managers were only interested in the bottom line of numbers, quantity, not quality. They continued to talk out of both sides of there mouth, first quality, then quantity. Until all American management are replaced or trained in a quality programs, or Fiat replaces them with there own people, I doult if Chrysler improves in quality, there is a mind set that is impossible to change in American managers, they were trained that way.
      Kathy
      • 3 Years Ago
      It's not a belly; it's a wrist. Is he a bodyguard with his hand on a gun?
      Sylvie
      • 3 Years Ago
      Shades of the studebaker Packard merger.
      • 3 Years Ago
      [blocked]
        RJC
        • 3 Years Ago
        A Swiss cousin of mine (note not German), has mentioned ADAC reports in the past many times when we've discussed cars (also note, he is an ME). Apparently, they hold more water than you think. As for the reliability reports, I don't think you could rename this one any different: http://www.samar.pl/__/3/3.a/62638/BMW-dominates-2010-ADAC-reliability-report.html?locale=en_EN Fiats are in the top three in two catagories.
      • 3 Years Ago
      [blocked]
      beams6
      • 3 Years Ago
      Fix It Again Tony= FIAT Their real problem all along is that there has always been strict inport quotas in Italy for importing cars. So Fiat never had to compete with the japanese or korean cars on quality. Fiat cars have always been cool, innovative, and fun handling vehicles. Its just that their quality was awful. Thats why they pulled out of USA back in the early 80's.
        Chris Olden
        • 3 Years Ago
        @beams6
        You're so funny! Do you really think Italy is "protected" from imports? In the free market EU? They're wide open for competition, more than the US!
      stclair5211
      • 3 Years Ago
      So more unemployed or what? Save American jobs! Hope AND change.
        helloac
        • 3 Years Ago
        @stclair5211
        If Fiat hadn't stepped in, every single Chrysler employee would have lost their job. How's that for saving American jobs?
          Hazdaz
          • 3 Years Ago
          @helloac
          No, no... he's probably perfectly fine with losing tens of thousands of Chrysler positions, and ultimately hundreds of thousands of overall jobs indirectly supported by Chrysler because he didn't want to give them a LOAN to continue operating.... a LOAN which they have paid in full - with interest. He also probably would have been perfectly fine with them going under simply because they employ a few lower-paying assembly jobs in Mexico.... because you know, if a company doesn't build 100% of their products in the US, then they deserve to fail. Never mind the fact that I would be willing to bet that his TV, his computer, his clothes and most of the other things in his home/apartment/cave were made in China by companies that are willing to outsource ALL their manufacturing to other countries. At least with car manufacturing, we are still holding on to SOME of those jobs here in the US. Where is the outcry when GE sends their jobs overseas?
      rjen164497
      • 3 Years Ago
      Another Obama folly. Bail out Chrysler, and they haven't paid us back yet, and now a foriegn company reaps the profit. Imagine the fools who will vote for him again.
        Ronald Tate
        • 3 Years Ago
        @rjen164497
        Can you spell George W. Bush? This crisis caused McCain to want to cancel his campaign so congress could handle all this mess when PRESIDENT BUSH was still in office and had been for 8 years. O'bama hit the ground running and handled it the best it could be handled. Quit calling people "fools". This is a serious insult. You bet I will vote for PRESIDENT OBAMA!
          rjen164497
          • 3 Years Ago
          @Ronald Tate
          I would say by your ignorance, FOOL is the correct word. Wait Idiot fits better.
          steven
          • 3 Years Ago
          @Ronald Tate
          vote for obama,you are some kind of a nut job.
          badhog8
          • 3 Years Ago
          @Ronald Tate
          there will always be someone
      • 3 Years Ago
      [blocked]
    • Load More Comments