List of Dodge Dealers to be closed

Coloviper

Enthusiast
Joined
Dec 5, 2006
Posts
1,883
Reaction score
0
Location
Colorado
Not sure who decided what for the closings, but here in Colorado, some of the worse and most corrupt Chrysler dealers (one I have had personal experience with when I bought my 07 Jeep SRT8 new from them) were left off the closure list, while the ones I have experienced with the best service and prices were on the closure list. They basically went by the ones in the city to keep and anything remotely rural was shut down without a care or due dillegance thought process. Interesting that the ones they kept were owned by dodge and the ones they shut down here were paid for privately owned franchies like Medved and Burt. Some people will now have to drive over 300 miles for warranty work on their vehicles or an oil change. Makes absolutely no sense to me.

There is however an appeals proces and I believe it takes place on June 4th, in Federal court. Last chance effort for those unfairly treated Dodge dealerships in Colorado. This was confirmed by the owner of the Dealership that my Viper bay is in sometimes.

Let's hope someone comes to their senses before finale.

It is interesting because the small dealership I bought my Viper from in 06' the owner was saying that the only way to survive was to just have an American Motors dealership that sold Ford/Chrysler/GM. I am willing to bet that if Ford had accepted Fed money, that could have easily happened. Maybe it still will in the end.
 

Warfang

Enthusiast
Joined
Nov 27, 2004
Posts
6,912
Reaction score
0
Location
California, East Bay
I'm curious to how you figure Consumer Reports plays into this when they don't accept advertising and do all their own testing? IMHO, they just tell it like it is. In my profession, they have been correct.

Consumer Reports is as much as scam as any of the other press. Who owns them? Also, what do they REALLY know about cars? When you're trying to do everything and be everything to everyone... you'll fall short on most of those things.
 

1BADGTS

Enthusiast
Joined
Mar 18, 2008
Posts
3,881
Reaction score
0
Not sure who decided what for the closings, but here in Colorado, some of the worse and most corrupt Chrysler dealers (one I have had personal experience with when I bought my 07 Jeep SRT8 new from them) were left off the closure list, while the ones I have experienced with the best service and prices were on the closure list. They basically went by the ones in the city to keep and anything remotely rural was shut down without a care or due dillegance thought process. Interesting that the ones they kept were owned by dodge and the ones they shut down here were paid for privately owned franchies like Medved and Burt. Some people will now have to drive over 300 miles for warranty work on their vehicles or an oil change. Makes absolutely no sense to me.

There is however an appeals proces and I believe it takes place on June 4th, in Federal court. Last chance effort for those unfairly treated Dodge dealerships in Colorado. This was confirmed by the owner of the Dealership that my Viper bay is in sometimes.

Let's hope someone comes to their senses before finale.

It is interesting because the small dealership I bought my Viper from in 06' the owner was saying that the only way to survive was to just have an American Motors dealership that sold Ford/Chrysler/GM. I am willing to bet that if Ford had accepted Fed money, that could have easily happened. Maybe it still will in the end.
If i may i believe Chrysler is looking at the above and saying if so and so dealership was -is so good at pleasing their customers then they should have bought more units and inturn ,sold more cars.As i posted earlyier its a SALES NUMBERS GAME ,unless you bought x amount of units per year from Chrysler that was it.
 

Martin

Enthusiast
Joined
Dec 15, 1997
Posts
1,810
Reaction score
0
Location
Silicon Valley, CA and Portland, OR
If i may i believe Chrysler is looking at the above and saying if so and so dealership was -is so good at pleasing their customers then they should have bought more units and inturn ,sold more cars.As i posted earlyier its a SALES NUMBERS GAME ,unless you bought x amount of units per year from Chrysler that was it.

Unfortunately, it wasn't only how much you sold - but what you sold. Chrysler told dealerships which cars they wanted them to move (high margin, low quality) and a lot of the dealerships that we really like and trust, wouldn't play their game. A lot of those dealerships are on the list even though they were profitable.

What makes me angry is that some of the dealerships that got cut were more profitable, and had happier customers, than the ones that didn't get cut. There are a LOT of corporate politics involved here. This is why we really need to make our voices heard - there are people in the decision process that KNOW they did something wrong and they don't want it to become public knowledge. A lot of dealers that we support are put between a rock and a hard place with this - they know that making waves will just upset the political machine even more, and they don't want to be on someone's radar screen if they do make it past this cut. That puts it in our court to make enough waves that enough questions are asked in court that warrants a full investigation into why certain dealers were cut and others weren't.

About the only thing going for the dealers in this situation is the wording of the law. Chrysler had to have adequate reason to cut them for the cut to be legal. If it can be shown that certain dealers were cut because of subjective decisions, and others were left off the list for subjective reasons, that puts ALL the cuts into question - which puts enough question in to the mind of Judge Gonzalez to not just blindly accept the motions put forth by Chrysler. This, in turn, might give the dealers enough time to mount a viable defense.
 

Tom Sessions

Enthusiast
Joined
Oct 3, 2000
Posts
808
Reaction score
0
Location
Hampstead,NC.
The dealer I work for is on the list.We have had so may calls from customers as to what they are supposed to do.The local news reported we were closing.We will stay open as a used car store and continue to service our customers.The bad part is they will have to deal the store that chrysler is giving the dodge line to.This dealer has a very bad reputation and does not have the money or shop space to handle the Dodge line up.So the Diesel truck guys are up the creek.The store I am at would handle all three car lines and they have the money to take them over.But all this means nothing.So a sad day indeed but we will be there for our customers needs as best as we can.

Thanks Alot Chrysler LLC
 

tennis tom

Viper Owner
Joined
Sep 3, 2007
Posts
77
Reaction score
0
I definitely don't dispute any of that at all. At the very least, this is a good 'wake up call' for all of us that have been asleep at the wheel and allowing elected officials to do what they have been doing. The laws need to be changed, the corruption needs to go, and we, the people, need to take more responsibility and action in demanding change that sets our country on the right track again.

Well said Martin and AMEN !
 

1BADGTS

Enthusiast
Joined
Mar 18, 2008
Posts
3,881
Reaction score
0
Unfortunately, it wasn't only how much you sold - but what you sold. Chrysler told dealerships which cars they wanted them to move (high margin, low quality) and a lot of the dealerships that we really like and trust, wouldn't play their game. A lot of those dealerships are on the list even though they were profitable.

What makes me angry is that some of the dealerships that got cut were more profitable, and had happier customers, than the ones that didn't get cut. There are a LOT of corporate politics involved here. This is why we really need to make our voices heard - there are people in the decision process that KNOW they did something wrong and they don't want it to become public knowledge. A lot of dealers that we support are put between a rock and a hard place with this - they know that making waves will just upset the political machine even more, and they don't want to be on someone's radar screen if they do make it past this cut. That puts it in our court to make enough waves that enough questions are asked in court that warrants a full investigation into why certain dealers were cut and others weren't.

About the only thing going for the dealers in this situation is the wording of the law. Chrysler had to have adequate reason to cut them for the cut to be legal. If it can be shown that certain dealers were cut because of subjective decisions, and others were left off the list for subjective reasons, that puts ALL the cuts into question - which puts enough question in to the mind of Judge Gonzalez to not just blindly accept the motions put forth by Chrysler. This, in turn, might give the dealers enough time to mount a viable defense.
Martin i understand what your saying but to mount that viable defense could be a extremely costly and futile because of the terms of the bankruptcy laws.
 

tennis tom

Viper Owner
Joined
Sep 3, 2007
Posts
77
Reaction score
0
Martin i understand what your saying but to mount that viable defense could be a extremely costly and futile because of the terms of the bankruptcy laws.

You are right on that count! I once went the way of the courts attempting to defend my private property rights. I spent about $1 million and about 15 years of my life and LOST!

Like they say "Don't try sueing city hall." One federal case per lifetime was enough for me, but the experience was better than a Harvard law school education in understanding how the gov and politics really operate.

And like I said, at the end of the day, judges get their paycheck from the government and are loathe to rule against their boss.

Conclusion: The Constitution is irrelavant.
 
Last edited:

99 R/T 10

Enthusiast
Joined
Jun 4, 2001
Posts
10,314
Reaction score
0
Location
Enterprise, AL USA
Martin, you sound like a wise man and I have no way of disputing your knowledge of the legal facts, it would take me too long of a time to study the legal papers, nor would I want to spend my time that way. I would rather be playing tennis, driving my Viper or my Jeeps.

What I do know is, that the law today, is what you can afford to buy a politician to pass for you. Our laws are no longer being created for the general good but for special interest groups. They hire attorneys to draft laws, regulations and amendments to laws. These laws and regulations, are amended with time, to tighten the noose around business owners. These laws and regulations are preambled with words that claim they are for the general good or only to be short-lived to answer an "emergency". But, like taxes, once passed they never go away and only get more draconian.

I don't see anything that is happening in the US today, in the markets or the auto industry, that is for the general good. Regarding the "legality" of the proceedings, crime is rampant in our streets and laws are being broken all the time with little or no consequence. The thieves who break into our vehicles do so countless times with little or no punishment. They are out doing it again the same day before the ink is dry on their arrest reports. Why all the zeal to punish capitalists to the fullest extent of the law, when we have 30,000,000 illegals running around breaking our laws with no consequence?

This bankruptcy procedure may have the gov stamp of being "legal" but it has nothing to do with being good for the general welfare of our nation or it's citizens and the thousands of employees effected.

At the end of the day, when the folks who work in that bankruptcy court, cash their pay checks, those paychecks are signed by the gov. And, if they want to keep their JOBS, whether appointed or elected, they better tow the government line and do what's expected of them to do. If they don't they are going to be in the un-employment line with the folks who worked at the Dodge Dealerships.


Well said Tom :2tu:
 

1BADGTS

Enthusiast
Joined
Mar 18, 2008
Posts
3,881
Reaction score
0
You are right on that count! I once went the way of the courts attempting to defend my private property rights. I spent about $1 million and about 15 years of my life and LOST!

Like they say "Don't try sueing city hall." One federal case per lifetime was enough for me, but the experience was better than a Harvard law school education in understanding how the gov and politics really operate.

And like I said, at the end of the day, judges get their paycheck from the government and are loathe to rule against their boss.

Conclusion: The Constitution is irrelavant.
Very true years ago my family subdivided a piece of property in the town of Colts Neck NJ .We had 40 acres total (two acres per lot )and only were approved for 9 lots total when technically we should have been granted 13 by the subdivision zoning(building lots at that time were selling for 500,000-800,000 per lot )The head of the planning board basically told us to take the nine lots and run knowing we could not afford to be ******* for years in court (hundreds of thousands in attorneys fees )with a possibility of losing in the end under the stipulation the town was acting to maintain their integrity.
 

viperdrummer

Enthusiast
Joined
Feb 9, 2001
Posts
1,424
Reaction score
0
Location
Richmond Virginia
The Constitution is NOT irrelevant----yet. Federal Judges (and I have a relative and several former partners among that group) are mostly good, hard working people who could care less who is writing their checks. In fact, most I know are angry at the Government for keeping their pay so low as compared to what they could make or were making in the private sector.

In over 25 years of practicing law throughout the US I have seen Judges spank the Govt pretty damn ******* numerous occasions.

There are bad Judges just like there are bad doctors, bad teachers etc etc. Those who worry about the Constitution, and they should, need look no further than Harry, Nancy Barney and their current boss. And they should REALLY worry about the type of lifetime kooks they are capable of putting on the Federal bench including the Supreme Court. This is my greatest fear because up until now the judiciary has done a pretty good job of fixing messes by the other branches. But when you have a President who talks about judges having outcome based decisions etc without resort to the law we are all in a lot of trouble.

What is going on right now with the car companies is a crime. It started at Congress and is now being ruined at the executive level. All of this could have been avoided and now it looks intentional. I spent the last few weeks in London where every business person was telling me "don't end up like us". As one member of Parliament was quoted on TV "all countries who try to become socialist have one thing in common--they ultimately run out of money".

As I see my lawyer friends in London and Germany living in tiny condos driving smart cars I wonder is this my children in 20 years??
 

Coloviper

Enthusiast
Joined
Dec 5, 2006
Posts
1,883
Reaction score
0
Location
Colorado
1BADGTS;

You might be right on the sales figures as the dealership I go to was just opened brand new four or years ago. Privately funded dealership with Dodge, Chrysler and Jeep lines. It is state of the art, with service that was absolutely second to none. Hence it probably did not have the numbers on a historical level if in comparison yet.

I can tell you a lot of their business came also from people in Northen Colorado as well. They drove right by the one crap dealership I was referring to in Thornton and came down to this end of town.

Of the dealerships that will be left in Colorado, (there will be only 5 for the whole state now), I would only shop or service at 1 of them and it is pretty damn far from me.

If Dodge does in fact close the one that I go to, it will be the LAST Dodge product I ever buy new. Sure I may pick up an old Cuda or GTS Coupe, etc. , but as far as new, ain't going to happen. GM neither, not that I have ever owned a GM beyond the GMC truck I bought in 1993, back when they made a decent truck.

Guess we will know in early June.
 

tennis tom

Viper Owner
Joined
Sep 3, 2007
Posts
77
Reaction score
0
The Constitution is NOT irrelevant----yet. Federal Judges (and I have a relative and several former partners among that group) are mostly good, hard working people who could care less who is writing their checks. In fact, most I know are angry at the Government for keeping their pay so low as compared to what they could make or were making in the private sector.

In over 25 years of practicing law throughout the US I have seen Judges spank the Govt pretty damn ******* numerous occasions.

There are bad Judges just like there are bad doctors, bad teachers etc etc. Those who worry about the Constitution, and they should, need look no further than Harry, Nancy Barney and their current boss. And they should REALLY worry about the type of lifetime kooks they are capable of putting on the Federal bench including the Supreme Court. This is my greatest fear because up until now the judiciary has done a pretty good job of fixing messes by the other branches. But when you have a President who talks about judges having outcome based decisions etc without resort to the law we are all in a lot of trouble.

What is going on right now with the car companies is a crime. It started at Congress and is now being ruined at the executive level. All of this could have been avoided and now it looks intentional. I spent the last few weeks in London where every business person was telling me "don't end up like us". As one member of Parliament was quoted on TV "all countries who try to become socialist have one thing in common--they ultimately run out of money".

As I see my lawyer friends in London and Germany living in tiny condos driving smart cars I wonder is this my children in 20 years??

Viperdrummer, I think we are generally in agreement with what is going on and that what is going on is a CRIME. I mean no offense to any of your friends, family or associates who are good people--but we are entering into a new era of empire that was thrust on us by the collapse of socialism--the irony is that we are now embracing socialism, just another form of totalitarianism. The stakes are too high--control of the globe--to allow the ants--that's us--a say anymore and to go about in relative freedom.

I'm from frisco, grew up there and been in business there. (And I use the term frisco with all due dis-respect). I've recently moved to the other side of the bridge out of concerns for my personal and mental safety--a lot of good soft-hearted and soft-headed people in Southern Marin, makeing it a relatively safe place to be for now.

I had a date with the Supremes a few years back and recognized that a lot of what was going on in DC had it's origins from frisco. You have your Boston Barney, Teddy and Harvard back East and we have our Bezerkley, Pelosi, Boxer, Feinstein, the Burton machine out West.

A fine example of where we are heading occurred on the evening of May 1st, (socialist Mayday) when a band of black hooded thugs went on a window smashing rampage in the ritzy Union Square shopping district. At 9 PM in the evening they smashed storefront windows of such bastions of coporate capitalism as the Gap and Mrs. Field's Cookies. They pulled a shopping cart filled with a keg of beer with them. There have been no arrests made and the local press gave it very little play. We have very few cops to patrol our steets here which is also a political decision. When I was in DC I noticed how well the government protects itself with police patrols every 30 seconds. I never felt safer--now if they would only protect it's citizens with a fraction of that vigilence.

This kind of thuggery has been routine around here for years. The destruction and disregard for private property that occurs in frisco is now being practiced by the Federal government to quickly redistribute the wealth and create new global distribution channels for those who can afford to buy govenrments wholesale.
 

1BADGTS

Enthusiast
Joined
Mar 18, 2008
Posts
3,881
Reaction score
0
1BADGTS;

You might be right on the sales figures as the dealership I go to was just opened brand new four or years ago. Privately funded dealership with Dodge, Chrysler and Jeep lines. It is state of the art, with service that was absolutely second to none. Hence it probably did not have the numbers on a historical level if in comparison yet.

I can tell you a lot of their business came also from people in Northen Colorado as well. They drove right by the one crap dealership I was referring to in Thornton and came down to this end of town.

Of the dealerships that will be left in Colorado, (there will be only 5 for the whole state now), I would only shop or service at 1 of them and it is pretty damn far from me.

If Dodge does in fact close the one that I go to, it will be the LAST Dodge product I ever buy new. Sure I may pick up an old Cuda or GTS Coupe, etc. , but as far as new, ain't going to happen. GM neither, not that I have ever owned a GM beyond the GMC truck I bought in 1993, back when they made a decent truck.

Guess we will know in early June.
I was also told that MANY of the dealerships in relation to this thread were warned numerious times in the past by Chrysler to start ordering more cars or else.
 

Martin

Enthusiast
Joined
Dec 15, 1997
Posts
1,810
Reaction score
0
Location
Silicon Valley, CA and Portland, OR
I was also told that MANY of the dealerships in relation to this thread were warned numerious times in the past by Chrysler to start ordering more cars or else.

And, in some cases, it wasn't just 'more cars' but 'more of the cars we want you to order'... Many dealers who didn't play the game and stuck with the cars that had lower overall profit margins or otherwise didn't fit into the objectives that the manufacturer had (CAFE standards, for example) got the axe. They still made plenty of profit, but they didn't fit into the mould that had been cast for them. Or was it the mold that had been cast at them...
 

RoadiJeff

Viper Owner
Joined
Jun 25, 2006
Posts
954
Reaction score
0
Location
Wildwood, MO
I'm sure this has been brought up in a similar thread but do Chrysler and GM have an excess of dealerships for the amount of cars and trucks they sell, as compared to Toyota?

In 2008, Chrysler sold about a million new cars at about 3,300 U.S. dealers compared with industry leader Toyota, which sold about 1.6 million cars at a dealer network of about 1,200 dealers, less than half the number of Chrysler dealers, according to court documents.

Source: Terminated Chrysler Dealerships to Challenge Sale (NewsDaily)
 

1BADGTS

Enthusiast
Joined
Mar 18, 2008
Posts
3,881
Reaction score
0
I'm sure this has been brought up in a similar thread but do Chrysler and GM have an excess of dealerships for the amount of cars and trucks they sell, as compared to Toyota?

In 2008, Chrysler sold about a million new cars at about 3,300 U.S. dealers compared with industry leader Toyota, which sold about 1.6 million cars at a dealer network of about 1,200 dealers, less than half the number of Chrysler dealers, according to court documents.

Source: Terminated Chrysler Dealerships to Challenge Sale (NewsDaily)
EXACTLY in my NJ county alone (Monmouth )we have 2 Lexus dealers,2 Merc Benz dealers ,2 Toyota dealers appox 10 Chevy dealers approx 8 Dodge dealers
 

Martin

Enthusiast
Joined
Dec 15, 1997
Posts
1,810
Reaction score
0
Location
Silicon Valley, CA and Portland, OR
EXACTLY in my NJ county alone (Monmouth )we have 2 Lexus dealers,2 Merc Benz dealers ,2 Toyota dealers appox 10 Chevy dealers approx 8 Dodge dealers

I'm not disputing anything - but it is hard to draw a direct correlation here. There really isn't any concrete data released yet that substantiates the notion that more dealerships has an adverse effect on Chrysler. Also, comparing the foreign dealerships to the US dealerships is more difficult because the respective dealership networks were built out over, and in, different times. Most of the foreign dealerships didn't start building out their US presence until the late sixties, and they generally picked territories that they were quite sure could sustain them. The US dealerships were historically mom and pop shops in rural areas at first, and those legacy dealerships largely hung around as new US dealerships were added in urban areas.

In a free market, we've already seen a lot of unprofitable dealerships go under. They died of natural causes. What doesn't quite make sense is the closing of dealerships that are profitable and in some cases the only Chrysler/Dodge/Jeep dealerships in a territory - when neighboring single or dual-brand stores that were less profitable didn't make the death list. That seems to go against free market logic as well as Chrysler's arguments for reasons to close certain stores.
 

1BADGTS

Enthusiast
Joined
Mar 18, 2008
Posts
3,881
Reaction score
0
I'm not disputing anything - but it is hard to draw a direct correlation here. There really isn't any concrete data released yet that substantiates the notion that more dealerships has an adverse effect on Chrysler. Also, comparing the foreign dealerships to the US dealerships is more difficult because the respective dealership networks were built out over, and in, different times. Most of the foreign dealerships didn't start building out their US presence until the late sixties, and they generally picked territories that they were quite sure could sustain them. The US dealerships were historically mom and pop shops in rural areas at first, and those legacy dealerships largely hung around as new US dealerships were added in urban areas.

In a free market, we've already seen a lot of unprofitable dealerships go under. They died of natural causes. What doesn't quite make sense is the closing of dealerships that are profitable and in some cases the only Chrysler/Dodge/Jeep dealerships in a territory - when neighboring single or dual-brand stores that were less profitable didn't make the death list. That seems to go against free market logic as well as Chrysler's arguments for reasons to close certain stores.
A buddy of mine is a general manager at one of the largest (if not the largest )Merc Benz dealership in the country this guy claims that they are so few foreign dealerships in comparison to domestic because market share wise =there is only so much water in the well.In NJ at least (the most populated state in the country per square mile )there definately is some kind of moritorium that limits the amount of foreign car dealerships for a reason.
 

GTSnake

Enthusiast
Joined
Oct 26, 2000
Posts
2,747
Reaction score
20
Location
Motor City
I'm not disputing anything - but it is hard to draw a direct correlation here. There really isn't any concrete data released yet that substantiates the notion that more dealerships has an adverse effect on Chrysler. Also, comparing the foreign dealerships to the US dealerships is more difficult because the respective dealership networks were built out over, and in, different times. Most of the foreign dealerships didn't start building out their US presence until the late sixties, and they generally picked territories that they were quite sure could sustain them. The US dealerships were historically mom and pop shops in rural areas at first, and those legacy dealerships largely hung around as new US dealerships were added in urban areas.

In a free market, we've already seen a lot of unprofitable dealerships go under. They died of natural causes. What doesn't quite make sense is the closing of dealerships that are profitable and in some cases the only Chrysler/Dodge/Jeep dealerships in a territory - when neighboring single or dual-brand stores that were less profitable didn't make the death list. That seems to go against free market logic as well as Chrysler's arguments for reasons to close certain stores.

I don't think so. There IS a negative effect from too many dealerships.

"Detroit’s move to cut dealers is long overdue
H
ow does getting rid of car dealerships help GM or Chrysler? This is a question I’ve been asked a lot, as Detroit’s struggling automakers move to slash nearly 2,000 dealer­ships across America.
Dealers like to argue that they generate auto sales and aren’t contributing to the automakers’ billion-dollar losses.
“Dealerships equal reve­nue to manufacturers, not costs,” according to a May 21 statement from the National Automobile Dealers Associa­tion.
That may sound convinc­ing, but it’s not true — and the nation’s dealers, upset as they might be over the im­pending cuts, know it. Doz­ens of dealers complained to me about the glut of dealer­ships and the problems that causes when I wrote a series in 2007 about the problem, titled “Dealership Overload.”
Dealers sued to stop glut

Dealers have themselves been warning Detroit’s auto­makers for decades that they were adding too many stores. In repeated lawsuits, dealers tried to block new stores, arguing there were already too many and adding more would hurt business.
Unfortunately, Detroit’s automakers believed so strongly that more dealers would equal more sales — a misguided concept they’ve since abandoned — that they often fought their existing dealers in court.
A few years ago, for ex­ample, four GMC dealerships sued to stop GM from adding more franchises in Chicago.
It took the Supreme Court of Illinois to block the effort.
“There are a total of 27 GMC dealerships in the Chicago area,” the court observed.
Why too many is bad business

So, why are all those deal­erships bad for business?
When a company steadily loses sales, as GM and Chrys­ler have, it doesn’t need — and can’t financially support — as many workers, factories or, as it turns out, stores.
Last year, GM and Chrys­ler dealers, which have more than 22,000 brand franchises combined into about 9,500 dealerships, sold about 199 vehicles per franchise.
By contrast, Toyota, which has been growing sales with just 1,461 dealership franchis­es in the United States, sold an average of 1,518 vehicles per store.
That means the average Toyota franchise sold nearly eight times as many vehicles as the average GM or Chrys­ler dealer.
Consequently, Toyota dealers had a lot more money to spend on advertising, up­grading facilities and custom­er service, like free coffee and rental cars.
Dumpy dealerships

When I was working on the series in 2007, a Chrysler dealer in the Boston area wanted me to visit his Dodge store so he could show me what a dump it was and how badly it was hurting Chrys­ler’s image.
This dealer wanted to upgrade his run-down store, but, the way he saw it, Chrys­ler had crowded so many dealerships into his area to fight over a shrinking pie that he would never be able to sell enough cars and trucks to pay for the renova­tions.
Dealers clustered in an area would move quickly to discount cars and trucks — sometimes taking a loss — just so they could close the sale and move a vehicle off their lot.
Cutting the price obviously hurt the dealers and the auto­makers.
But the dealers had no choice. If they didn’t, another nearby deal­ership sell­ing the same models most certainly would.
As if to emphasize how illogical this situation had become, the dealership chain Auto Nation recently noted that its GM dealerships slat­ed for closure as part of the automaker’s restructuring contributed “0%” to Aut­o Nation’s bottom line.
Translation: They didn’t make any money. At all.
This is no way to run a business.
Detroit’s overloaded net­work of dealership has excess administrative costs, too.
There’s a lot of debate about how to calculate these.
But Detroit’s automakers spend billions delivering vehicles to stores and of­fering a variety of adminis­trative services, such as mar­keting assistance, training, parts-and-service support, auditing and other behind­the- scenes activities, such as basic communications.
At the end of the day, no­body likes to see any commu­nity business closing down and taking jobs with it. But to save Detroit’s automakers — and provide any hope of growth — downsizing dealer­ships is precisely what’s needed. The automakers and their dealers have known this for years.
Does it hurt? Of course it does.
But when America stops buying Detroit’s cars and trucks, Detroit’s automakers have no choice.
WHEN A COMPANY STEADILY LOSES SALES, IT CAN’ T SUPPORT AS MANY STORES."
 

tennis tom

Viper Owner
Joined
Sep 3, 2007
Posts
77
Reaction score
0
GTSnake, you make some good points, but how does closing dealerships help an auto company attract new buyers, sell cars and service them. I will now have to go 50 miles to see a dealer for my Viper and Jeeps. Fortunately these two American brands are WELL made and I probably won't need to visit a dealer for warranty work. I'll get my routine maintainance done at an independent shop. I had good experiences with my now CLOSED dealerships and would prefer to go to them.

The Toyota, Bmw, Merc, Honda, Lexus, Infinity, Porsche and Ferrari dealers are within minutes of me. America should be doing what all these other manufacturer's governments do, PROTECT their citizens jobs with trade restrictions. Eventually--or maybe now--America will not be able to compete in the world market, place because we have nothing to sell exccept for piles of paper and empty cardboard boxes we ship back to China, by the barge load for recycling. My opinion is that our economy has been running on fumes for a very long time now and we have been squnadering our accumulated past wealth.

The people who work at the closeing dealerships showed up for work and performed services. They are being given the axe due to the high legacy costs exacted by the UAW.

If we are going to enforce the laws of the marketplace on the auto industry, forceing them to be lean and efficient by way of Draconian gov edicts, then lets do the same for everybody. Let's make all the able bodied on welfare, sitting at home or hanging out on the corner, pull their weight--GET A JOB BUMS! They and the 40,000,000 illegals working in the underground economy, creating unfair competition.
 
Last edited:

Fast1

Enthusiast
Joined
Feb 22, 2007
Posts
66
Reaction score
0
Location
Phoenix, AZ
It seems almost fitting for the dealership I bought my 06 and 08 viper from. Performance Dodge in Phoenix, AZ really hosed me on my 06 trade and sale for my 08. They had promised me a price when the car was ordered and changed their minds when they actually had the car and tried a market value increase of the price on the 08. After a lot of arguing and some legal counsel, I actually got an alright deal, but still not what they had initially promised. I told them that I had done a lot of marketing and had helped to sell several vehicles (about 11 I think) by recommending them. At the time I said karma was a mother and I hope it caught up with them. Well, KARMA IS A MOTHER, HOW DO YA LIKE ME NOW!!!!
I just wish more of the corrupt dealers got the boot and the better ones got to take over their sales.
 

GTSnake

Enthusiast
Joined
Oct 26, 2000
Posts
2,747
Reaction score
20
Location
Motor City
GTSnake, you make some good points, but how does closing dealerships help an auto company attract new buyers, sell cars and service them. I will now have to go 50 miles to see a dealer for my Viper and Jeeps. Fortunately these two American brands are WELL made and I probably won't need to visit a dealer for warranty work. I'll get my routine maintainance done at an independent shop. I had good experiences with my now CLOSED dealerships and would prefer to go to them.


That's one of the necessary evils that a financially strapped company has to deal with. It's a case of the benefits outweigh the costs. They were way over saturated and now have no choice but to cut back and reduce. If you compare the number of Toyota dealerships to domestic it's a fraction of the total.
 

tennis tom

Viper Owner
Joined
Sep 3, 2007
Posts
77
Reaction score
0
GTSnake, my point is that we have an out of control spend-thrift government that doles out tax payer's money *****-nilly, based soley on politcal payback.

Chicago's ex-mayor Blogoyavich is an excellent example of this monumental economic corruption. He was just a bit over the top about it. The US now has a pres who came out of the Chicago party machine but is a bit more subtle about it.

My point is that we give out aid to every wack job program from here to Timbuctoo. Maybe we should give some WELFARE to hardworking American's to HELP them in their time of need. Where's the compassion for these folk, who seem to be mainly in the rural areas and the Heartland? I can't help but think these decisions being made by Gov Bankruptcy Court Agents are not based soley on politcal paybacks.

Like I said before, it's all well and good to attribute the wholesale slaughter of the US auto industry to marketplace dynamics--if we had an econmy based on the market--but we have NOW turned the corner with the new regime in power. The goverment decides which banks, insurance companies and auto manufacturer's shall live or die--and that is called SOCIALISM a diluted form of totalitarianism which tightens the noose around you one regulation at a time.
 
Top