Comments on: Bob Nardelli Should Update His Resume

By: Tom Furnival

Tom Furnival — Fri, 17 Apr 2009 16:08:43 +0000

Having worked for 10 years a GM (Delco Electronics) and 1.5 years at Chrysler (Huntsville), I am of the opinion that Daimler’s long range plan was to eliminate Chrysler from US competition. Complete destroy this competitor. First they announced a joint venture with Chrysler, then they confiscated their resources, they sold off their capabilities. Huntsville operation went to a German company and some of their body capabilities went to other German companies. This left a shell with most of the capability being German. Essentially we have the Germans producing a car called a Chrysler. A lot of loyal Chrysler customers realized this and abandoned the German effort. Daimler saw that their camouflaged German operation was exposed and dumped it. That is the way I see it.

I think if Daimler is to do business in the US they should be made to divest themselves and pay restitution to the Chrysler Corporation. Say, $300.00, for each Mercedes sold in the US for 10 years. Daimler prevented small car development at Chrysler. I also do not think Bob Nardelli, is not from the right industry. Surely there are a lot of real auto executives with the balls to guide Chrysler to success. I think there is enough US know-how to get Chrysler back without another foreign influence. That whole Daimler thing was a big mistake. Is there a market for Chrysler? I think a bigger market than the German market in the US.
This is all my opinion. I do not see our Government sitting by and allowing foreign the dismantling of our auto industry. The next think, we will be selling GMC to India.

By: Jason

Jason — Sat, 10 Jan 2009 00:43:17 +0000

GM has more brands than they’ve got sense enough to manage them: GMC, Chevy, Cadillac, Pontiac, Buick, Saturn, Saab, and Hummer.

I do like how they have CAR in red type, slightly larger, and severely italicized, as if they feel compelled to remind us what business Pontiac is in. Or perhaps it is a subtle way of saying what Pontiac is not: Pontiac is not SUV; Pontiac is not turnip; Pontiac is not profitable.

By: pants

pants — Sat, 10 Jan 2009 00:31:40 +0000

i wonder what would happen if chrysler went public again. maybe they could try that as a hail mary.

PT cruisers look like a weird cross between a jelly bean and a cockroach.

haha i just went to pontiac.com to see who they were made by (GM, in case anyone was wondering.) it says in all caps: PONTIAC IS CAR and it looks very LOL-ish on its own. I’m laughing uncontrollably at this.

By: mark r

mark r — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 18:08:05 +0000

Chrysler does actually have some decent cars. The one that looks like the CTS is kind of cool, and has relatively nice interiors.

To the PT cruiser dood: It’s a PT Cruiser. It is also the cheapest car on any rental car lot, probably cheaper than the chevy cobalt. But it’s big and it looks weird so they get people to think they’re giving them an ‘upgrade’ when really they’re just raking them over the coals once again. You are a sucker.

PT Cruisers were relatively popular when they were released though, remember?

By: alyx

alyx — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 15:20:33 +0000

I have trouble even naming a vehicle currently in production at Chrysler right now (though from the comment above, I can see they still make that one odd Dodge Neon/station wagon crossbreed). And I drive a 10-year-old Ford, so it is not like I have some kind of bias against American vehicles or anything.