Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Chrysler Is Up For Sale! Gm May Be Chrysler!
Hashkafah.com > Misc. Advice & Help! > Money & Finance
the Real Adiel
GM held talks with Daimler-Chrysler about buying it. I don't understand it.

They currently have 1 brand (Jeep) and three products (minivans, PT Cruiser & 300M/Charger/Magnum) that are worth anything. On the other side they are losing buckets of money, would compete with GM for the same sales...it just makes no sense (unless they're going to shut most of it down which they can't do because of pension/healthcare obligations.)
shaya_getzl
Yes, GM will bring its excellent management skills and assembly quality to them krauts.
exfallsburg
QUOTE(shaya_getzl @ Feb 19 2007, 02:32 PM) [snapback]795711[/snapback]
Yes, GM will bring its excellent management skills and assembly quality to them krauts.

rofl.gif rofl.gif rofl.gif
But Chrysler hasn't bean fully krauted.
investor relations
Its also been rumored that the talks are regarding a joint product development between both companies. Its rumored to be in the SUV category. So what makes less sense, GM buying Chrysler or them manufacturing SUV's together?
Another rumor has XM and Sirius satellite radio merging together. This makes sense, but will it get approved?
the Real Adiel
QUOTE(investor relations @ Feb 19 2007, 02:46 PM) [snapback]795725[/snapback]
Its also been rumored that the talks are regarding a joint product development between both companies. Its rumored to be in the SUV category. So what makes less sense, GM buying Chrysler or them manufacturing SUV's together?

If GM would just get it's own global operation together and start creating global platforms to share they would be able to slash their product cycle from 4-5 years to 2 years which would help the company big time. Why would they need to manufacture SUVs with Chrysler? They sell enough of them that they shouldn't have to worry about development cost.


IMHO GM is in the best position for a turnaround because they still have massive scale and there is so much room for improvement. Toyota is almost the same size and has maybe a quarter of the platforms that GM has.
exfallsburg
Why not?
shaya_getzl
QUOTE(the Real Adiel @ Feb 19 2007, 02:56 PM) [snapback]795731[/snapback]
IMHO GM is in the best position for a turnaround because they still have massive scale and there is so much room for improvement. Toyota is almost the same size and has maybe a quarter of the platforms that GM has.


If by "multiple platforms" you mean same car sold under a dozen names, then yes, historically GM beats even Ford in that department ...
investor relations
Link

NEW YORK - XM Satellite Radio Holdings Inc. and Sirius Satellite Radio Inc. have agreed to merge, the two companies said Monday.

The deal would consolidate the only two companies in the emerging business of subscription-only satellite radio, and is sure to face tough scrutiny from federal regulators. Investors and analysts have been speculating about a deal for months.

The two companies said in a statement that Mel Karmazin, the CEO of Sirius, would become chief executive of the new company while Gary Parsons, the chairman of XM, would remain in that role.
the Real Adiel
QUOTE(investor relations @ Feb 19 2007, 03:35 PM) [snapback]795764[/snapback]
Link

NEW YORK - XM Satellite Radio Holdings Inc. and Sirius Satellite Radio Inc. have agreed to merge, the two companies said Monday.

The deal would consolidate the only two companies in the emerging business of subscription-only satellite radio, and is sure to face tough scrutiny from federal regulators. Investors and analysts have been speculating about a deal for months.

The two companies said in a statement that Mel Karmazin, the CEO of Sirius, would become chief executive of the new company while Gary Parsons, the chairman of XM, would remain in that role.

Monopoly.....
investor relations
QUOTE(the Real Adiel @ Feb 19 2007, 04:55 PM) [snapback]795785[/snapback]
Monopoly.....

Being that its obvious they cant exist without each other, why shouldn't it get approved?
NY-LON
QUOTE(shaya_getzl @ Feb 19 2007, 08:33 PM) [snapback]795760[/snapback]
If by "multiple platforms" you mean same car sold under a dozen names, then yes, historically GM beats even Ford in that department ...

Oh, VW's doing well now... VW Golf, Skoda Octavia, Seat Leon, Audi A4--all the same basic platform.
the Real Adiel
QUOTE(shaya_getzl @ Feb 19 2007, 03:33 PM) [snapback]795760[/snapback]
If by "multiple platforms" you mean same car sold under a dozen names, then yes, historically GM beats even Ford in that department ...

The platform is the chassis usually with a few different transmissions/engines/suspension variations. For example the GM W-body platform cost 5 Billion to develop and was used for dozens of models and was introduced in 1988 (it's still in use, but has undergone many revisions). If GM can get together with its Asian, European and Australian R&D centers and make 7 basic platform (compact, mid-size, FWD full size, RWD mid-large size, SUV, Luxury mid-size, luxury full size) to be shared among them all, they could justify upgrading after three years and then launching a new platform after five as opposed to upgrading every 5-7 years and launching a new platform every 15-20 years.

This would do more for GM then anything else as it could genuinely compete and beat the European and Japanese products, instead of relying on styling (which it hasn't been great at) and price.

QUOTE(investor relations @ Feb 19 2007, 04:02 PM) [snapback]795794[/snapback]
Being that its obvious they cant exist without each other, why shouldn't it get approved?

I agree, but the flip side is they can now charge what they like and provide poor service and nobody could do anything about it. I think it well get through because the service is far from a necessity and if they hike the price people will just stop using the product.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2008 Invision Power Services, Inc.