Jalopnik 
Enter your username and password.
Detroit, 11:52 PM
Sun Nov 29
14 posts in the last 24 hours
Tip your editors:
tips@jalopnik.com
Editor-in-Chief:
Ray Wert | Email | AIM
Road Test Editor:
Wes Siler | Email
Weekend Editor:
Murilee Martin | Email
Associate Editor - Houston:
Matt Hardigree
Associate Editor - Detroit:
Ben Wojdyla
Editor-at-Large:
Mike Spinelli
Contributors:
Mark Arnold
John Krewson | Email
Andy Didorosi
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
05/31/09
[blog.caradvisorynetwork.com]
Just thought you'd like to know...
05/31/09
[www.akkamsrazor.com]
[noresize.com]
[bangshift.com]
Just thought you'd like to know.
05/31/09
Then Chrysler corporate would swoop in and suddenly find financial "issues" and pull the franchise leaving the dealership owners with inventory on hand. There are implied references made to indicate the dealer has done something illegal in spite of the fact there has been no illegal activity. The inventory would be tied up in probate and the dealership can't sell it. Meanwhile the dealership now has a huge debt incurred from expansion. Bankruptcy is about the only way out.
As to separate dealerships for the brands, who the hell can afford separate facilities for Chrysler, Dodge, and Jeep? UDMan states "Since part of my job deals with evaluating possible new dealers, as well as auditing existing dealers, I'm in the unique position to understand this process."
Sorry, but considering the consistent stories I have heard about from former dealers in multiple states, there may be more to this than meets the eye. Is UDMan presenting "the whole truth and nothing but" or just the true parts that are favorable to the company position?
05/31/09
I agree. Here in Detroit, the daily news is consumed with this issue. yet, nobody has been able to explain how closing dealers saves the manufacturers any money. Jim Press had a lengthy interview on one of the local radio stations about the matter and the only thing I got out of it was that marginal dealers can't hire the best people so they hurt the reputation of the manufacturer. But if these dealers can remain profitable, they can't be hurting that reputation too much. Catch the interview here. [www.wjr.com]
It seems to me that this is just another reason dreamed up by a bunch of egghead MBAs at the manufacturers to explain why American companies can't compete. "We have way more dealers than Toyota and Honda. THAT must be the reason we can't compete. Yeah, that's it."
05/31/09
About the Seperate Dealerships I talked about, there are a number of dealers who operate dual competing brands in the same building. I'll take a couple of examples I know of. There was (emphasis on was) a Cadillac Jaguar dealer in Hartford, operating under the same showroom. All the owner did was separate the showroom with a glass wall, and that was it. Neither GM or Ford (who owned Jaguar at the time) was happy about it, but they couldn't pull either franchise because of strong franchise laws. There were literally a dozen other dealership owners that promised to put up brand new separate facilities for each brand, following the manufacturers blueprints for square footage, decor, signage, and number of service bays.
Yes I did side with the manufacturer. Because of the strong franchise laws, a dealer didn't have to meet quotas, update facilities, or maintain adequate CSI. The only way they would lose their franchise is if they were criminally negligent, or lose their primary source of funding. After years of having the manufacturers ask politely to update their image, get a competing make out of the same facility, or sell a couple of more vehicles at the expanse of gross margins, the time has come due to the dealers that played hardball.
05/31/09
Each and every dealer usually has a minimum stocking level of cars. Lets use a round number like 10. Chrysler just eliminated around 800 dealers, so that will be around 8,000 cars that won't need further factory assistance to move, 8,000 less cars to pay the dealer holdback to, 8,000 less units that the captive floorplan company has to audit.
You also can reduce the number of field support personnel used to support these do nothing dealers, along with reducing the other support structures (less promotional crap to produce, reducing the number of trucks to service the dealers, and the costs go down from there.
With the money saved, you can increase the spiff levels to the strong dealers (spiff is a car term for promotional money or cash given to the dealers or the sales staff) to reach their targets, or better yet, to exceed their targets in stocking levels, and sales levels. Smaller dealers tend to hang on to gross margins, large dealers tend to make less per transaction. This is only the beginning anyway. Stay tuned
05/31/09
If the answer was no to all your done. If the answer was yes to one you might make it. If it's yes to all, your set, plus you get a GM franchise.
05/31/09
Conspiracy theorists are really somethin', regardless of party.
05/30/09
05/31/09
05/30/09
*sigh*
Let me try to lighten the mood.
What do you get when you cross a Chrysler with a Fiat?
A large car that won't start.
05/30/09
05/30/09
No this is happening because it has taken years to get rid of those dealers who wouldn't play by Chrysler's rule book (Not stocking cars, not selling enough units, selling more used than new, and not buying or selling out to other dealers to combine one Chrysler Jeep Dodge store) because of very strong local franchise rules.
I have it on good authority that GM may file for chapter 11 tomorrow, and then it will make public those 1,100 dealers than GM notified it no longer wants. I already know of a few GM dealers that won't have their franchise agreements in my local area renewed.
In the Hartford area (and surrounding inner suburbs) there is but one Chevrolet dealer remaining. We lost the following dealers: Cadillac (combined with Jaguar!), 2 Buick/Pontiac Dealers, a Chevrolet/Hummer/Buick dealer, 2 Saturn retailers, and a GMC Truck store. Actually, the economy has dictated most of these loses, as a Lincoln Mercury dealer, and a large Ford dealer has also closed.
05/30/09
Nope - naught to do with that.
05/30/09
05/30/09
Ooops! No you're not! Not no more! Uh-uh! No way, Jose! Done! Next!
(By the way, as much as I understand this complaint, how many dealerships are NOT mixed franchises anymore? I would think at least two to one are mixed over stand alone...???)
05/30/09
05/30/09
05/30/09
business model, and changes have to be made. Fiat knows it, the Federal government may/may not know it. Ok, they probably have no clue, but the poll numbers say it's a good idea!
Sorry if I jumped around a bit. Ah, well, we all can't be as good of a scribe as UDman. And that's one well-written analysis, sir.
05/30/09
05/30/09
I hope you all enjoy my continuing feature over at CarDomain called the Obscure Muscle Car Parking Lot, and while I'm shamelessly plugging away, I have my own collumn over at Rich Truesdell's excellent site, Automotive Traveler, appropriately called "Ramblings". Here's some recent posting in the column:
[www.automotivetraveler.com]
05/30/09
05/31/09
05/30/09
Nah, couldn't be.
05/30/09
At least those dealers will still have a franchise (the other brand) to sell, at least for now.
05/30/09
05/30/09
05/30/09
05/30/09
Your Chevy's are imports. They're imported from Mexico where they are assembled. Here's an idea for GM, bring jobs back to the U.S and stop outsourcing to other countries. Then and only then, can you call yourself and American vehicle.
He didn't capitalize American or Chevy. Patriot my ass.
05/30/09
05/30/09
05/30/09
05/30/09
*Runs away*
05/30/09
05/30/09
Buy American cars, support national health care... in Canada.
05/30/09
05/31/09
05/31/09
The dollars, somewhat as well, of course.
05/01/09
05/01/09