Woah there thats not what Automotive news online says....as of like 2002 chrysler owned nearly 40 % of Mitsubishi Very controlling if you ask me........ And all 2006 vehicles as of April 2006 will all be AMERICAN built 2.0 1.8 2.4 and 3.0 .......6 Plants to be exact thats where I am going w/ that....Even Japanese cars will carry our motors......Look it up, not to mention we have our hands in Volkswagons future to turn their sales back up.....Read that in the Automobile Magazine Geneva Cover.........I think it was that???? The caliber and Colt will carry volkswagon and Diamler motors. (AVAILABLE) w/ that is.

 

OOOPS forgot to add HYUNDAI/KIA as well even though KIA uses Mazda currently. http://europe.autonews.com/column.cms?columnId=8 http://www.theautochannel.com/

 

The 1.8, 2.0, 2.4 will be built at a new non DC, non mitsu plant. Its a joint effort thats its own entity. Chrysler sold a bit of mitsu back to them. I think its about 30 percent now.

 

its because mitsu is falling apart, and chrysler doesnt want to get pulled down with them







they would rather hang on to their lineup of anchor like sedans to pull them under

 

[sm=icon_rofl.gif]

I love the fine print!

 

but remember joe...the dakotas are selling just fine!

 

You know actually I tried to buy a new ram last week but nobody had what I wanted. Of course those dirt cheap leases could have been the reason! The daks were doing well I heard because of the buy one get three free promotion!

 

we aren't losing jobs, because of the people on the top of the corporation, we are losing jobs, because UNIONS make American workers OVERPRICED. why pay extra for the same product...think about it with a business sense.
[/quote



What do you think the top brass at Toyota , Honda etc make in a year? Not even close to what the American auto executives make. When Dieter and Shremp took over they had to have a major pay raise just to be competitive with our upper management pay rates. 95 pay grades getting 100% of their pay in the profit sharing , we union over payed workers got 2.38% 92 pay grades received I think 8% or close to it. We union workers are trying to hold on to our pensions we don't have golden parachutes that give us milloins in stock options lifetime use of cars or corporate jets , so yes it is at the top and if they want to be like Toyota and the rest of the so called cheap makers of the same product they can get what their people on top make! If it was not for the unions you would not get paid vacations or health care or many other benifits that you seem to take for granit. If you work for Daimler Chrysler QUIT so you can save the company some money then go to work for a non union supplier and bust your a#% for $7.00 an hr and live on that. If the union were to disband what do you think that the Toyotas of the world would do? I have a clue they would cut their peoples pay and benefits so fast because they would not have to worry about the unions coming into their plants that is the only reason they make as much as they do. So do the unionized workers make a good living yes why because we have been working to enrich the lives of all workers not just auto for many decades. Question do you think NAFTA CAFTA is helping America my guess is YES.

 

Interesting concept. Not a bad idea.... send the Ford's, Chebby's and Toyota's to the back row.

From my viewpoint, and coming from an entirely different non-union manufacturing industry.... I can see why managment and or the union would apply pressure to those employees to be more brand loyal. As an ops manager, I don't see this as harassment, I view this more as a policy to improve morale. It may be more an issue for new-hires than senior employees.

If you have 20 loyal employees working in a team, and 2 mavericks that would rather buy a competitors product, wheather it be stock or vehicles.... especially since you receive discounted prices, then I can see where it would create conflict. It's like participating in stock options, 401K or stock purchase plans.... do you think it would be appropriate for management to offer a competitor's stock as an option in your plan?

I think this would send the wrong message, not to mention it would fuel the competitors R&D efforts.

I'm guessing that a typical $40K vehicle enjoys a 50%-60% gross margin. If that's the case, for each competitors vehicle you buy puts an additional $20K into the competitors pocket... as opposed to your own pocket. Make sense?

I think its best practice to buy and drive the brand you make, and make it better by providing immediate feedback to engineering. If the employees don't show interest with brand loyalty, why in hell would a customer want what you don't want.

 

I agree with you 100 %!