Chrysler Marketing Chief Warns That All 3181 Dealers May Face Elimination

Discussion in 'General Motoring' started by Jim Higgins, May 21, 2009.

  1. Jim Higgins

    Jim Higgins Guest

    Chrysler Marketing Chief Warns That All 3181 Dealers May Face Elimination
    http://tinyurl.com/qhqtg6

    Chrysler’s marketing chief is issuing a stark warning to those who
    insist it didn’t need to fire 789 of its dealers as part of its
    court-protected bankruptcy reorganization. “The stark reality is all
    3,181 dealers will face elimination,” Steven Landry, executive vice
    president of marketing, asserts in a new posting on the automaker’s
    blog, TheFirehouse.biz.

    The troubled automaker, which filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy
    protection, late last month, has taken some sharp criticism for its
    decision to eliminate nearly a quarter of its retail body, but in his
    blog, Landry insists the process of choosing which retailers to drop was
    “thorough, rigorous” and fair, and was based on a “data-driven metric”
    that looked at factors such as sales volumes, customer satisfaction, and
    whether the dealer handled all or just some of Chrysler’s three brands.
     
    Jim Higgins, May 21, 2009
    #1
  2. Jim Higgins

    MoPar Man Guest

    "The stark reality is all 3,181 dealers will face elimination"

    What the hell kind of comment is that?

    What is he saying? The Chrysler is gonna find a way to sell cars
    without using dealers?

    Or that Chrysler could just as easily fold and therefore have no cars to
    sell - period?

    And that by cutting 25% of it's dealers, that will make the difference
    for it to stay alive?
    Chrysler has a blog?

    And they call it "TheFirehouse.biz" ?

    What - chrysler is burning so they came up with that name?

    Was ChryslerBlog.biz already taken?
     
    MoPar Man, May 21, 2009
    #2
  3. Jim Higgins

    Bill Putney Guest

    The whole thing sounds kind of weird, but these are weird times.
     
    Bill Putney, May 21, 2009
    #3
  4. Jim Higgins

    News Guest


    "DupedByCerberus.net" is available.
     
    News, May 21, 2009
    #4
  5. Hi!
    Really? It seems doubtful to me--especially since the idea that's been
    projected (and I'd assume it's an honest one) is that Chrysler LLC "wants"
    to become viable again and renew their business.

    How they'd ever manage to pull that off without dealerships I don't know. I
    guess they could sell cars direct, but I think that would be a logistical
    nightmare and something that would also be received cooly by the general
    public.

    William
     
    William R. Walsh, May 22, 2009
    #5
  6. William R. Walsh, May 22, 2009
    #6
  7. Jim Higgins

    Bill Putney Guest

    Hah! The public has been icy about most of this deal. Why would they
    start listening now. After all - there's an agenda to be carried out,
    and it has nothing to about the economy recovering.
     
    Bill Putney, May 22, 2009
    #7
  8. Jim Higgins

    MoPar Man Guest

    I'm playing the video (May 20)

    Story Behind Dealer Downsizing (Steve Landry).

    Points / Comments / Questions :

    - Project "Alpha" started in 2001 to consolidate Chrysler, Dodge and
    Jeep brands under "one roof". I take it that at the time, that Plymouth
    had already been discontinued. And by "one roof", that Chrysler was
    forcing all dealerships to become (or carry) Chrysler, Dodge and Jeep
    brands.

    - Term used to describe the optimum or desired dealership is one that
    "sells over 100% minumum sales responsibility". What the hell does that
    phrase mean?

    - Project Alpha continued up til 2007, when it seems to have been
    renamed to project Genesis.

    - Factors deciding which dealers would be cut included
    - Minumum sales responsibility and facility (again, WTF is that?)
    - dueled with another franchise
    - customer scorecard

    Those were the basic factors. They changed based on the market, the
    State, or the environment in which the dealers coexisted with others
    (which is a very muddled explanation).

    Basic facts about the 789 US Chrysler dealerships to be closed:

    - 44% sell vehicles made by a competitor and will continue to
    do so after their chrysler franchise is terminated

    - 83% sell more used cars than new cars, and they will continue
    to do so

    - the 789 dealers to have their Chrysler franchise pulled represent
    25% of the current dealership total, but account for 16 of
    sales volume. Which is, if you ask me, not a huge imbalance,
    and likely there are dealerships in this group that sell their
    full share, if not higher, of the total sales volume.

    - 50% of the 789 dealers sold fewer than 100 new vehicles in
    2008 (I assume they mean Chrysler vehicles). There seems to be
    no accounting for the horrible market conditions in 2008, or
    the historical performance of these 789 dealerships.

    - 40,000 unsold vehicles at those 789 dealerships will be
    redistributed (meaning that they don't own them ???)
    This redistribution started May 20 and is projected to
    take 3 weeks. This is an average of 50 vehicles per
    dealership.

    - Parts inventory will also be redistributed.

    - Annual sales volume (presumably US sales volume) reached more
    than 16 million units "a few years ago" and aren't forecast to
    exceed more than 12 million in the next 2 years. This is
    presumably for all auto makers who sell vehicles in the US.

    Absolutely no explanation given for how or why the dealership network or
    individual dealerahips constitute a monentary operating expense for
    Chrysler or affect the profitability of the company.

    Absolutely no explanation given as to why natural market forces can't,
    or don't, operate on individual dealerships such that the dealership
    network is reduced by attrition.

    Absolutely NO MENTION of how these dealership closing will result in a
    reduction of costs for Chrysler.

    Absolutely no mention of the fact that this will lead to an EROSION or
    loss of sales and market share as these dealerships switch to selling
    competitor's products.

    Also on that website, this video:

    Under the Pentastar: May 22, 2009

    Doesn't play for me.
     
    MoPar Man, May 22, 2009
    #8
  9. Jim Higgins

    Licker Guest

    : "or why the dealership network or individual dealerahips
    constitute a monentary operating expense for Chrysler or affect the
    profitability of the company. Absolutely NO MENTION of how these dealership
    closing will result in a reduction of costs for Chrysler."

    As mentioned before: Taken from an article on Slate
    "It saves them money. Car companies don't actually own dealerships-instead,
    they have contractual agreements that dictate factors like location, display
    space, signage, and service options. Nevertheless, Chrysler and GM and other
    auto manufacturers must maintain a large, costly field force of trainers (to
    train technicians to fix cars), salespeople (to persuade dealers to buy more
    cars), and auditors (to verify claims for reimbursement). The more
    dealerships, the more go-betweens a car company needs to employ and the more
    money it has to shell out."


    See full article at http://www.slate.com/id/2218761/?GT1=38001



    \
     
    Licker, May 22, 2009
    #9
  10. Jim Higgins

    Bill Putney Guest

    Probably a term very specifically and legally defined in the franchise
    agreements.
    It might be interesting to know what that is too - were too competitive
    in pricing ( readily engaged in "price duels")? - or badmouthed the
    dealer down the street?
    That, or they will be bought or credited back to them at some final
    settlement when they are officially closed - there's bound to be some
    standard form that has already been drawn up to itemize a net settlement
    - just like a house or any other closing. Chances of the net settlement
    figure on any given day up to the closing for a given dealer being $0.00
    is probably astronomically small. Someone - either Chrysler or the
    dealer will be writing a check to some entity representing the other.
    Maybe Obama will take them out on the street and hand them out to the
    poor - you've heard of "redistribution", right? (sorry - couldn't
    resist that little play on words)

    Seriously - just like the cars - a 'settling up" will take place.
    Natural market forces? Where have you been? Google "fascism".
    Seriously - why would you think of using the term "natural market
    forces" in this discussion?
    Probably incremental savings as discussed before. And in a
    government-run operation, reason (and free-market pressures) take a back
    seat to all kinds of artificial pressures (IOW - it wouldn't matter if
    there are savings or not - to a politician all that matters is that
    something is being done that some logic having nothing to do with
    reality can be sold to the people pulling the strings, and possibly a
    different logic can be sold to the public (though I don't think the
    public is buying it - and if we do, the collective "we" deserve what we
    end up with).
    See above. How is that any less logical than the fact this was all done
    for the unions, yet Chinese cars are going to be imported into the U.S.
    (in the GM deal anyway)? Your problem is that you're trying to make
    sense of a business being run by a government (and not just *any*
    government - a government that does not even pretend to believe in a
    free market economy).
     
    Bill Putney, May 22, 2009
    #10
  11. Jim Higgins

    Steve Guest

    What about BenzedOver.org?
     
    Steve, May 22, 2009
    #11
  12. Jim Higgins

    MoPar Man Guest

    ===================
    Chrysler Media Site/Blog Account Status Denied

    Thanks for your interest in accessing the Chrysler media site and
    TheFirehouse.biz media and analyst-only blog. We issue media
    registration rights to working analysts and members of the working press
    only. A member of the working press is one who is paid as an employee,
    freelancer who regularly contributes, or representative of a known and
    established media organization (newspaper,magazine, television, radio,
    etc.).

    All creative assets on the media site are for editorial use only.
    Commercial use, including advertising,marketing and merchandising, is
    strictly prohibited.

    If you have additional information that we may not have considered,
    please contact and someone will respond
    to you within one business day.
    ==================

    Go suck my dick Chrysler.
     
    MoPar Man, May 23, 2009
    #12
  13. Would you not rather have Angelina Jolie or similar do that?

    DAS

    To send an e-mail directly replace "spam" with "schmetterling"
     
    Dori A Schmetterling, May 23, 2009
    #13
Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.