Daimler & Chrysler

And, I would venture to add, with the Mercedes-Benz car division management.

However, there is/was some logic to the merger/take-over. Chrysler's unit
car output for its domestic market is double that of the MB brand worldwide.
So if you want to multiply your unit sales, especially in the US, you buy a
US car company. Still, BMW did not find it necessary, but then they
probably didn't have the recources.

DAS

For direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling
---

"meirman" <meirman DeleteThis @invalid.com> wrote in message
news:pu34g15dad634cbte5dckuedsb2r3pnsn0@4ax.com...
> In rec.autos.makers.chrysler on Tue, 16 Aug 2005 06:27:55 GMT Moon Guy
> <someone DeleteThis @hell.low> posted:
[...]
>
> That would be fine with me.
[...]
 >> Stay informed about: Daimler & Chrysler 

Dori A Schmetterling wrote:

> And, I would venture to add, with the Mercedes-Benz car division management.

Why, can't they handle getting thrashed by the "low-end" American
division?
 >> Stay informed about: Daimler & Chrysler 

It's a good quip but I can tell you that I don't think MB's managers were
ever happy with getting involved with Chrysler. Another adventure that
diverts top management attention from making the good cars that made the
reputation of the 'Star'. Maybe the Chrysler division is making more money
than Merc Cars at present, but that is because MB cars need attention, what
with quality and dealer service issues, not least in the USA.

I am not sure the 'integration' was greeted with much enthusiasm in Germany.
I would not be surprised if there was still little cooperation among the MB
& Chrysler dealerships, for example.

The Mercedes brand is intimately involved in the evolution of the motor car
and has been responsible for the introduction of many automotive
innovations, whether developed in-house or elsewhere. The new S-Class, for
example, is a signpost of what will become commonplace technology in the
next few years. It cannot be allowed to go down the tubes... and top
management has finally publicly acknowledged that there are problems, and
Juergen Schrempp -- widely blamed for many problems -- has finally stepped
down as CEO with less than full honours.

I guess we all know that the man stepping up to the top job is Dieter
Zetsche, who was more successful in his job as Chrysler head than expected.
As he is a completely different character to Mr Schrempp, it is possible
that MB Cars will recover.

DAS

For direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling
---

"Steve" <no.RemoveThis@spam.thanks> wrote in message
news:w9CdnardsYXozJ_eRVn-pg@texas.net...
[...]
>
> Why, can't they handle getting thrashed by the "low-end" American
> division?
 >> Stay informed about: Daimler & Chrysler 

"harry" <harry_liuNOSPAM DeleteThis @lcc.com> wrote in message
news:ZmAMe.615$5U2.238@lakeread07...
> You don't understand Chinese! If they want to buy something, they will
> choose top brand name like Maytag or IBM, not Chrysler. They are smart
> enough to just sell Chrysler parts to make shitty cars and then save the
> money to buyout MB to BMW if they had financial trouble.
>
> Read the most recent Business Week--the raising of China and India.
>

But, China isn't smart enough to really understand what the US long term
game plan is.

Former President Clinton actually came out and admitted one time on
David Letterman that the entire point of NAFTA, and the other free
trade agreements, and the entire point of economic embracing of countries
like China is to get their economies so interdependent with that of the
United States that eventually, going to war with the US would be
cutting their own throats. And, the same is done in reverse, to us, as
a way of curbing the hawks here at home.

> I have Chinese blood with American minds because my root is here now. I
am
> afraid of seeing Chinese economical/military threat to US as much as you
are

As long as China remained independent of the rest of the world and had their
own economy, they could pose a credible threat.

But look for example at a very basic thing - steel manufacture.

More and more, Chinese steel is simply melted-down scrap from the
US. If tomorrow they went to war with the US, that flow of scrap would
halt, and it would put a serious crimp in their ability to make the steel
needed to make the guns used to go to war with us in the first place.

And it's not just steel, it's hundreds of different products.

> if not more. Instead of simply resisting/avoiding them, American need to
> work harder and smarter to stay competitive.

No, not at all. What Americans need to do is work really hard doing
the things that Americans do far better than Chinese do because of
fundamental cultral differences. For example, entertainment. The US has
the top position in the manufacture of entertainment. Scientific research
is another one. This isn't competition, this is dominating markets that we
can do better than China. By contrast China dominates markets that
we are are weak in. Ultimately this makes China dependent on our
continued well being.

Ted
 >> Stay informed about: Daimler & Chrysler 

Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:

> "harry" <harry_liuNOSPAM.RemoveThis@lcc.com> wrote in message
> news:ZmAMe.615$5U2.238@lakeread07...
>
>>You don't understand Chinese! If they want to buy something, they will
>>choose top brand name like Maytag or IBM, not Chrysler. They are smart
>>enough to just sell Chrysler parts to make shitty cars and then save the
>>money to buyout MB to BMW if they had financial trouble.
>>
>>Read the most recent Business Week--the raising of China and India.
>>
>
>
> But, China isn't smart enough to really understand what the US long term
> game plan is.
>
> Former President Clinton actually came out and admitted one time on
> David Letterman that the entire point of NAFTA, and the other free
> trade agreements, and the entire point of economic embracing of countries
> like China is to get their economies so interdependent with that of the
> United States that eventually, going to war with the US would be
> cutting their own throats. And, the same is done in reverse, to us, as
> a way of curbing the hawks here at home...

What I call the WalMart factor.

What I can't figure out is why, for Clinton, this also included letting
China in on military secrets. I knopw Gore needed funding for his
presidential bid.

Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with the letter 'x')
 >> Stay informed about: Daimler & Chrysler 

On Wed, 17 Aug 2005, harry wrote:

> You don't understand Chinese! If they want to buy something, they will
> choose top brand name like Maytag or IBM, not Chrysler.

....which is why they've bought Rover, the dowdy UK maker of dowdy UK cars.

> In the last ten years, I bought three American cars simply out of
> patriotism

Dumb basis for selecting a car.
 >> Stay informed about: Daimler & Chrysler 

Dori A Schmetterling wrote:

> It's a good quip

Thanks And like all "good quips," I'm afraid it holds a core grain
of truth.

> but I can tell you that I don't think MB's managers were
> ever happy with getting involved with Chrysler. Another adventure that
> diverts top management attention from making the good cars that made the
> reputation of the 'Star'. Maybe the Chrysler division is making more money
> than Merc Cars at present, but that is because MB cars need attention, what
> with quality and dealer service issues, not least in the USA.

Of course MB's quality slide began in about 1990, LONG before the
"merger" came about. In fact Chrysler's modern computer-oriented
industrial design capability was touted as one of the "plums" of the
deal, for MB. I don't know how much actual usage of the Auburn Hills
facility the Mercedes group has actually been allowed to have, though.
If there's been any, it hasn't been very public and the dated look of
the MB line doesn't show any marked leaps forward either. The Chrysler
line has undergone some major re-stylings, several engine introductions,
and a platform introduction since the merger, and the MBs look...well...
a whole lot like the '99 models.

>
> I am not sure the 'integration' was greeted with much enthusiasm in Germany.

There was certainly NO enthusiasm for it in the US.

> I would not be surprised if there was still little cooperation among the MB
> & Chrysler dealerships, for example.

Much like BMW drivers and Mini drivers, they don't even acknowledge each
others' existence.
 >> Stay informed about: Daimler & Chrysler 

Bill,

Finally I found someone who understands what I am trying to say here.

> What I call the WalMart factor.
And how China saved $700 billion US dollars in a few years.

>
> What I can't figure out is why, for Clinton, this also included letting
> China in on military secrets. I knopw Gore needed funding for his
> presidential bid.
Politician's mind is similar to a lot of nasty businessman. As long as
there is $ today, they would go with it without further thinking. When did
they care about ordinary people's tomorrow?
Clinton also OKed some US satellite to be launched by Chinese rockets simply
it is cheaper and he got to make some friends there...
 >> Stay informed about: Daimler & Chrysler 

> But, China isn't smart enough to really understand what the US long term
> game plan is.
Time will prove everything pretty soon.
>
> But look for example at a very basic thing - steel manufacture.
>
> More and more, Chinese steel is simply melted-down scrap from the
> US. If tomorrow they went to war with the US, that flow of scrap would
> halt, and it would put a serious crimp in their ability to make the steel
> needed to make the guns used to go to war with us in the first place.
China is capable of making good steel started right before WWII. Their
weakness is not on steel, it is on high tech electronics, semiconductor and
material science. These are the areas US ia still ahead but losing the
advantage really fast!

>
> No, not at all. What Americans need to do is work really hard doing
> the things that Americans do far better than Chinese do because of
> fundamental cultral differences. For example, entertainment. The US has
> the top position in the manufacture of entertainment. Scientific research
> is another one. This isn't competition, this is dominating markets that
> we
> can do better than China. By contrast China dominates markets that
> we are are weak in. Ultimately this makes China dependent on our
> continued well being.
Would you please give some examples on what kind of entertainment industry
US is leading China? I hope you don't mean Hollywood. Very few people are
buying legal DVD there...
Scientific research is a good example but I don't think it will still be for
too long. With their $700 billion foreign exchange savings plus hundreds of
billion of foreign investment poring into China, they can afford to hire top
brains to do whatever they are trying to achieve.

Super high tech can help to make top weapons to gain temporary advantages
but not necessary winning--Vietnam and Iraq are good examples.
At the end of day, American need to transform those heavy investment into
money making business to improve standard of living for general public.
What's good to American when you invented TV and cars and eventually let
Japanese and Chinese to make the money?
 >> Stay informed about: Daimler & Chrysler 

I am not surprised, but this would be for somewhat different reasons. Why I
find the lack of enthusiasm among German MB staff more interesting is that
they could consider themselves the 'senior partners' (or owners) of
Chrysler, and therefore perhaps take a benign view, but they don't,
considering it an unnecessary diversion.

On the reasons I subscribed to this NG was exactly because of this issue. I
wanted to follow a US car group and I selected Chrysler because of the added
interest caused by the Merc issue. I wanted to see how the core group of
customers/fans/enthusiasts take to this.

Plus I am a Merc fan and so the Chrysler 'situation' has an added interest
because of the effect (potential or real) it has on the MB business. As a
result I try to rent Chryslers when I am in the US or at least pay special
attention to them. The full product range is not yet available here in the
UK.

For example, not so long ago I had a Sebring convertible in LA.

DAS
--
For direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling
---

"Steve" <no.RemoveThis@spam.thanks> wrote in message
news:yPWdnb5sM9Ee4p7eRVn-3A@texas.net...
[...]
>
> There was certainly NO enthusiasm for it in the US.
>
[...]
 >> Stay informed about: Daimler & Chrysler 

I think we're slidinginto the realms of fantasy...

I had always thought TV was invented by someone who was interested in the
transmission of pictures...

DAS

For direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling
---

"Ted Mittelstaedt" <tedm.TakeThisOut@toybox.placo.com> wrote in message
news:newscache$vp0fli$1wu1$1@news.ipinc.net...
[...]
> Don't forget that TV was created to allow large corporations and
> politicians
> to program the US populace into believing what they wanted.
[...]
 >> Stay informed about: Daimler & Chrysler 

Nobody "lets" anybody do anything. It's called a free market.

DAS

For direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling
---

"harry" <harry_liuNOSPAM.TakeThisOut@lcc.com> wrote in message
news:YtUMe.693$5U2.346@lakeread07...
>
[...]
What's good to American when you invented TV and cars and eventually let
> Japanese and Chinese to make the money?
>
 >> Stay informed about: Daimler & Chrysler 

Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:

> Everyone says that but this ignores a fundamental and obvious thing, and
> that
> is the top brains, because they are top brains, make a lot of money and so
> can choose where they want to live. And nobody chooses to live in a
> totalitarian country.

Depending on their ethics (or lack thereof) and the money offered them,
I suspect they can be persuaded to live pretty much anywhere - certainly
for a finite period of time (until the contract is completed). IOW,
what a totalitarian country is willing to pay such an individual to
bring the entire country forward a bit could be enough to keep an
individual very very very comfortable for a very very very long time
(i.e., the short-term discomforts and the risks of being imprisoned or
killed could be considered worth taking).

Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with the letter 'x')
 >> Stay informed about: Daimler & Chrysler