Rumorpile: Ram Trucks Delays Redesign of Heavy Duty Trucks

FAILURE, The debt would not have been as big if Segrio AKA IDIOT would have not stolen the Billions to sink into the black hole called Alfa. The money stolen could have paid down debt and refreshed product lines but NO, Italian IDIOTS had to sink Billions into a pathetic car that has sold what 23 cars to date or so?

Come on, Ford and GM both build up inventories to get through the retooling. This I believe IMHO is more about the fact that he has FAILED as a CEO to build the company up wasting money and clearly has no clue about maximizing the US market.

This probably isn't a huge blow seeing as in how the HD's don't need to be updated as frequently as the LD's, but this is definitely an indication that this company is in trouble in my eyes.

Uh... everybody re-does their light duty trucks more often than the heavy duties.  Let me ax you all a question:  how many yerrs did Ford milk that old Super Duty?  And the GM trucks rode on the old chassis with new bodywork for a couple yerrs before gaining a new frame, etc.  The heavy duty light truck class is not affected by near as many competitive pressures.  Not concerned about Ram's decision.

37 minutes ago, Frisky Dingo said:

This probably isn't a huge blow seeing as in how the HD's don't need to be updated as frequently as the LD's, but this is definitely an indication that this company is in trouble in my eyes.

At the very least they are falling behind Ford and GM!

Why am I not surprised by FCA delaying yet another car or truck that is not a Fiat or a Jeep?

57 minutes ago, surreal1272 said:

Why am I not surprised by FCA delaying yet another car or truck that is not a Fiat or a Jeep?

Exactly!

We have impacted the iceberg captain and we are taking on water in the first 5 compartments.  Should we ask the head of the line Sergio  what he would like us to do now? 

This is getting more and more troubling to see.

Also troubling is the need for a partner to join them and how long it has been that no one appears to want to work with them. Not even a Chinese MFG has even been seen as wanting to opt in here.

I do not know how bad or good things are here but at face value things are going on well run, stable and solvent companies just don't do.

9 minutes ago, hyperv6 said:

We have impacted the iceberg captain and we are taking on water in the first 5 compartments.  Should we ask the head of the line Sergio  what he would like us to do now? 

This is getting more and more troubling to see.

 

Also troubling is the need for a partner to join them and how long it has been that no one appears to want to work with them. Not even a Chinese MFG has even been seen as wanting to opt in here.

I do not know how bad or good things are here but at face value things are going on well run, stable and solvent companies just don't do.

Exactly...

I think Sergio will sell diving tours to the wreck as a profit making opportunity to keep Alfa alive in Italy....

15 minutes ago, A Horse With No Name said:

Exactly...

 

I think Sergio will sell diving tours to the wreck as a profit making opportunity to keep Alfa alive in Italy....

Yup sinking FCA as he starts to destroy Ferrari. Their Socialist cast system of keeping things status quo and stealing from other places to prop up the delusional world of Italy will be the next country to bankrupt and implode. No Idea how they could think sinking billions into a dead name brand and then sell 23 is a good thing. I found a UK story that says Alfa sold 3,136 total in all of Europe. So even with that, clearly the brand is NOT selling. Also FCA story of Alfa outselling Fiat is a joke.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-chrysler-alfa-idUSBRE91900T20130210

Guess non of the points in the story above have happened. as here we are 2016 and his Alfa will sell 300,000 alone is not happening.

13 minutes ago, dfelt said:

Guess non of the points in the story above have happened. as here we are 2016 and his Alfa will sell 300,000 alone is not happening.

Hyper's sinking ship metaphor was very well placed....

For FCA to survive it will need more volume. They have a large company and they need to make more cars.

Fiat is not going to increase volume.
Alfa is never going to meet Sergio's projections

Maserati is going to always be that car for those who do not conform but are ok with leaving the car for Service.

Jeep will continue at its pace. It is a true global car as overseas it is seen as a Jeep not a American brand.

Ram I fear will begin to fall behind with less money coming to them.

Chrysler and Dodge will continue to try to reinvent their old products till either a partner is found or they die.

Ferrari is at risk of over exposure under Sergio. If that happens the Ferrari may become what Porsche did in the 80's a common car.

To fix the ship here they need to put money into Chrysler and let them do the work and not put the new product on old Lancia platforms.  Get the volume up and update the product to where it is relevant in America again and competing on all levels.

As it stands now I can see a possible failure of the FCA corporation now that Ferrari was set free. Jeep would be sold. Ram may be sold but no where at the price it could have been by the time they get there. Alfa and Maserati could be purchased by Ferrari at pennies on the dollar and sold at low volume.

Fiat could fade away as does anyone really care anymore?

The key to survival is though Auburn Hills but I just don't see it being done under Sergio.

@hyperv6 Well said, I could not agree more especially:

8 minutes ago, hyperv6 said:

The key to survival is though Auburn Hills but I just don't see it being done under Sergio.

No big deal, there is almost always a couple year difference between the intro of a lD and HD versions of a fullsize truck (ie F-150 in 15, Super Duty in 17).  Just more rhetoric to give the naysayers something to latch onto.  the LD is FAR more important here. 

Grand Wagoner also is said to be delayed over at Autoblog too.

There is no naysaying here. If GM was delaying as many programs and cutting all their small cars we would be saying the same thing of them.

I don't see the staggered updates as a bad thing because what @Stew said, he's right. Same as GM. The issue I do see is that yet another product was put on delay. If it was planned as a year or two stager that would be fine, but it wasn't. 

So, I'm not surprised. 

38 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

I don't see the staggered updates as a bad thing because what @Stew said, he's right. Same as GM. The issue I do see is that yet another product was put on delay. If it was planned as a year or two stager that would be fine, but it wasn't. 

So, I'm not surprised. 

There is an interesting article on Allpar that makes total sense.

http://www.allpar.com/news/2016/12/big-rams-held-back-a-bit-35534

Why risk production capacity of the much hotter and profitable LD to get the factory tuned for the new HD a little sooner?  Like everyone else they had always had a 1 to 2 year stagger between the LD and HD trucks anyway. 

WHERE is the new Dodge Omni?  WHERE is the new Dodge Aries?  Chrysler Sebring?  A dearth of small cars (and a tiny crossover for Dodge) is more concerning than a heavy duty pickup that those buyers don't want to change anyway.

I think what Sergio is doing here and has been doing for the past couple years is to trim R&D spend down to a minimum to show a profit and pay down debt.  He is making moves that make the company look more suitable for purchase.  The huge problem is if he doesn't sell the company come 2020 he has no product to sell except a couple Jeeps and a pair of Alfas.

Without US - CDN $ conversion.

I'm paying $1.19 a litre. ( 3.78 litre/US Gallon ). That's up .15 a litre since start of December.

I read $ 2.21/gallon is average for US. That's up .04 compared to November 2016, and .20 vs a year ago  

Bent Crude is $55 a barrel, highest since mid 2015...

This trend continues, and FCA will be in a world of hurt as they already are the least fuel efficient full line mfg. Ditching the Dart  and 200 will bite them big. 

7 minutes ago, FordCosworth said:

 

8 minutes ago, FordCosworth said:

Without US - CDN $ conversion.

I'm paying $1.19 a litre. ( 3.78 litre/US Gallon ). That's up .15 a litre since start of December.

I read $ 2.21/gallon is average for US. That's up .04 compared to November 2016, and .20 vs a year ago  

Bent Crude is $55 a barrel, highest since mid 2015...

This trend continues, and FCA will be in a world of hurt as they already are the least fuel efficient full line mfg. Ditching the Dart  and 200 will bite them big. 

 

This was what I was considering on the way home. OPEC has gotten an agreement with the oil market countries including those outside OPEC to decrease production. Add along with this the increase of the economy and increased production in MFG that increases the demand of oil and it will drive up the price. 

The man they were interviewing was retired from an oil company and said by the first of the year $77 per barrel could be possible again. 

This would really damage an automaker with no real viable small cars or range of cars at would help support them. 

The staggering is something most MFG have practiced for a long time but it is planned ahead. GM for many years plan their models with staggered introductions to spread out the cost. But what FCA is doing is they are delaying products that were planned not staggering the intro. This is a sign of cash flow weakness and the lack of money for development of these programs. 

We know it is a common fact FCA has been in money trouble from the time they took over Chrysler. The hope was the take over would give Fiat the Volume to lower development cost. The fact is they have more needs than they have money.

Let get this in the open. 

Who here thinks Chrysler products outside the Jeep line and to a lesser degree Ram  is up to date with the market and very competitive in the segment it is in. Where are they challenging or even competitive in the segment?  If so please point out the models and where they are leading other than the nearly dead Minivan market. 

Chrysler has the LX that is in major need of updates with a new modern platform that does not necessarily mean it has to be a small 4 seat car. They can make something similar to what they have just lighter and stiffer.  

The small cars are dead or nearly dead. That is it. No real offerings that are current or competitive. The 300 could own the segment and hold great ATP but it is selling for prices that are embarrassing. Great for a good deal bad for image and resale. 

The Trucks are an important model for volume and profits. In todays market you can not delay much anymore as all segments are needed for profits. 

Jeep has done well but that is about the only bright spot to focus on. 

Alfa has more work to do than Cadillac in the segment they are in. Maserati is not going to save Fiat. And Fiat as it is is something they are starting to wish never came to America. 

Now a partner could help but who. GM and Ford want nothing to do with this mess. VW would have been interested for the trucks and Jeep but now lacks the money to consider it. Toyota, Nissan and  Hyundai have no interest. 

Mazda could use a partner but they want one that is stronger. Mitsubishi has been mentioned but they are not much better off than Fiat. 

Does the Chinese come in? Is this entry into the American market with an American name? 

This is a real mess and it is going to get worse before it gets better. I look for Sergio to try to find a way for the Agnelli get out and make money and they don't care what happens to any of the companies. 

Branching off Ferrari was a sign of the ship going down and they only put Ferrari in a life boat Everyone else it is every division for themselves. 

Is there anyone here other than Stew who thinks Fiat buying Chrysler was a good move?

Important to remember that gas will never cost more than $3 a gallon, millenials all make $75,000 a year live in rural areas and buy big trucks and baby boomers aren't buying smaller vehicles, they want full size sedans.  

FCA has the lineup for the future, I think they might phase out 4 cylinders because no one buys those anymore.

The most important information here is that I did not know these highly profitable, labour intensive trucks to build are manufactured in Mexico.

Trump....do yer jerb dammit. Put 35% tariff. Thnk u.

The future of fuel efficiency is small CUVs and that is what they are coming out with, as are many other manufacturers.  remember, when gas prices spiked your average small car was lucky to et 30 on the highway and CUVs low/mid 20s.  Now CUVs are in the 30s, right in that sweet spot.  Small and midsize car sales are going to continue to shrink regardless of gas prices.....

The 800 pound Gorilla is in the corner of the room.

Even with Trump in and odds are some regulations may be relaxed the problem will be some states will do their own agendas. Also Trump is only here 4-8 years and it will change again at some point.

An automaker needs to have all irons in the fire as regulations can change faster than they can react or afford.

11 hours ago, smk4565 said:

Important to remember that gas will never cost more than $3 a gallon, millenials all make $75,000 a year live in rural areas and buy big trucks and baby boomers aren't buying smaller vehicles, they want full size sedans.  

FCA has the lineup for the future, I think they might phase out 4 cylinders because no one buys those anymore.

Nice Sarcasm!  

1 hour ago, Stew said:

The future of fuel efficiency is small CUVs and that is what they are coming out with, as are many other manufacturers.  remember, when gas prices spiked your average small car was lucky to et 30 on the highway and CUVs low/mid 20s.  Now CUVs are in the 30s, right in that sweet spot.  Small and midsize car sales are going to continue to shrink regardless of gas prices.....

When/ what is this time frame you're using? 

Here is 3/4yrs ago for fuel prices.... do you really think that short time ago, small cars where not " lucky " to get 30 mpg/hwy and CUV's in mid/low 20''s ( and now magically in the 30's? )

http://www.gasbuddy.com/Charts

2013/2014 - Mid Size car sales ( mainstream ) were pretty steady at that point. The ones that were tanking were the the FCA cars, and niche/never big volume movers ( VW, Subaru etc etc )

http://www.goodcarbadcar.net/2014/06/usa-midsize-car-sales-figures-may-2014-ytd.html

I am talking when prices started to soar talking anywhere from 2001 to around 2010.  Believe me, I remember when gas went from just over a dollar a gallon to 2.50+ a gallon lol. 

Deleted - duplicate 

My lowest price I ever paid for Gas was .49 cents. Guess that does make me old. Course with the oil reduction agreement, prices will spike and help the EV side even more.

I love the 10 year gas average as I expect us to be back up in a year near the 3.50 - 4 dollars a gallon.

1 minute ago, dfelt said:

My lowest price I ever paid for Gas was .49 cents. Guess that does make me old. Course with the oil reduction agreement, prices will spike and help the EV side even more.

Gas prices, they spike, then go down and level out higher than they were and repeat the cycle again and again.