A slammed door is starting to open!

[Viper Wizard]

You must be registered for see images

You must be registered for see images

 

[SkyBob]

What can we do to help, Chuck? Can we begin a letter writing campaign? Does anybody have an address that would be useful? I'm sure I could find a couple potatoes to mail to some people.

Bob

 

[eucharistos]

we're pulling for you chuck

 

[Mopar Boy]

What can I do to help you from Canada Chuck?

 

[steve911]

I certainly hope that the manufacturers get some sense pounded into their heads. Maybe threat of legislation will do the trick.

Steve A.

 

[TMan]

It is surely good to hear that our government will be open to a free enterprise compromise.

We are all pulling for you Chuck, It should be between Chrysler and their dealers concerning market reorganization.

Our company (auto related) is still going through this. There are a lot of Markets that are overburdened with dealers but it should be the local franchise's that make the decisions. In our situation, we made a lot of compromises to move some dealers, offer new territories to others and some we had to close forever.

Good Luck to you Chuck.

 

[Mike Dolan]

The part I don't understand, and haven't heard any explanation for is this:
How do the car companies think this will save them money? I realize there must be some expense to support a dealer, but isn't this cost relative to the sales volume?

I cannot imagine Tator's costing Chrysler much money, and relative to the good will he generates it's crazy to terminate that relationship.

Large volume dealerships generate more sales volume, but this doesn't come in a vacuum.
Do the small volume dealerships take sales from large volume dealerships, or from competitive brands?

If you lived in smalltown USA, and there wasn't a Chrysler dealership, would you travel a long distance, or simply buy a Ford or Chevy? Vipers are different, as in this market buyers are more brand loyal, but if there are no dealerships people still won't buy.

If I was currently contemplating buying a new Viper, traveling a long distance to get it is one thing, but local service is important too.

Regards,
Mike Dolan

 

[HHI VIPER]

we're pulling for you chuck

Ditto Chuck!! Good luck!

 

[slaughterj]

The part I don't understand, and haven't heard any explanation for is this:
How do the car companies think this will save them money? I realize there must be some expense to support a dealer, but isn't this cost relative to the sales volume?

I cannot imagine Tator's costing Chrysler much money, and relative to the good will he generates it's crazy to terminate that relationship.

Large volume dealerships generate more sales volume, but this doesn't come in a vacuum.
Do the small volume dealerships take sales from large volume dealerships, or from competitive brands?

If you lived in smalltown USA, and there wasn't a Chrysler dealership, would you travel a long distance, or simply buy a Ford or Chevy? Vipers are different, as in this market buyers are more brand loyal, but if there are no dealerships people still won't buy.

If I was currently contemplating buying a new Viper, traveling a long distance to get it is one thing, but local service is important too.

Regards,
Mike Dolan

They haven't seemed to articulate this too well. About the most I've been able to pick up is that the dealer density results in the older run-down ones not being able to sell enough vehicles to have enough funds to spend on facilities updates, creating a run-down image for the product line as a whole and dampening sales. That's a bit convoluted and not a direct cost though.

And for the older ones that don't do much sales, they should give them an alternative of becoming just authorized repair facilities, because that's most of their income anyway, and it's always good to have more of those locations available and convenient.

 

[Viper Wizard]

More info:

Aid to Car Dealers Stirs Fight - WSJ.com

House scrutinizing how auto dealerships selected for closure - CNN.com

 

[2snakes4us]

I sure hope this works out for you Chuck. We ALL want you to regain your dealership!
Good Luck!!!

 

[gen2lover]

GOD BLESS YOU CHUCK .We are all praying for you and your employees and your family. No one I know deserves some good news more than you. You have no idea how much you mean to all of us!

Kevin.

 

[WOT!]

The part I don't understand, and haven't heard any explanation for is this:
How do the car companies think this will save them money? I realize there must be some expense to support a dealer, but isn't this cost relative to the sales volume?

I cannot imagine Tator's costing Chrysler much money, and relative to the good will he generates it's crazy to terminate that relationship.

Large volume dealerships generate more sales volume, but this doesn't come in a vacuum.
Do the small volume dealerships take sales from large volume dealerships, or from competitive brands?

If you lived in smalltown USA, and there wasn't a Chrysler dealership, would you travel a long distance, or simply buy a Ford or Chevy? Vipers are different, as in this market buyers are more brand loyal, but if there are no dealerships people still won't buy.

If I was currently contemplating buying a new Viper, traveling a long distance to get it is one thing, but local service is important too.

Regards,
Mike Dolan

My take is the large dealers want less competition. With less dealers selling the same product, there is less need for discounting. I expect prices to rise once the recession is over. It always comes down to greed!

Best of luck Chuck!

 

[PatentLaw]

Nobody wants to say the obvious answer, but I will.

This was all about favoritism. Nothing more.

The same number of cars are being sold, just from different dealers. Service has shifted from some dealers to others. Some dealers were the fall guys, as it was made to appear that THEY were the ones that caused the company to go under.

It is similar to when a law firm starts to go under. What do they (the partners) do? Fire the associates. Why? Place the blame elsewhere instead of the decision makers.

 

[viperdrummer]

Nobody wants to say the obvious answer, but I will.

This was all about favoritism. Nothing more.

The same number of cars are being sold, just from different dealers. Service has shifted from some dealers to others. Some dealers were the fall guys, as it was made to appear that THEY were the ones that caused the company to go under.

It is similar to when a law firm starts to go under. What do they (the partners) do? Fire the associates. Why? Place the blame elsewhere instead of the decision makers.

That is last thing I would do if my firm (1000 lawyers) God forbid, started to go under. The associates are the ones who work the hardest and are paid the least --I am tossing the non productive partners if the ship is going down. Probably different in a smaller firm.

 

[slaughterj]

That is last thing I would do if my firm (1000 lawyers) God forbid, started to go under. The associates are the ones who work the hardest and are paid the least --I am tossing the non productive partners if the ship is going down. Probably different in a smaller firm.

Nice to hear! I'm sure you've heard the stories of various associate cutbacks in recent times, all too many of them due to "poor performance", but really the poor performance was on the partners who failed to properly manage their business and who failed by letting these people go with unwarranted blemishes on their professional records.

 

[Viper Wizard]

Is this the start of, "O S##T did we make a mistake?"

GM Admits Error in Dealership Closings - Local News | News Articles | National News | US News - FOXNews.com

 

[PatentLaw]

Nice to hear! I'm sure you've heard the stories of various associate cutbacks in recent times, all too many of them due to "poor performance", but really the poor performance was on the partners who failed to properly manage their business and who failed by letting these people go with unwarranted blemishes on their professional records.

By jove I think he's got it. In NYC, partners don't want the fight between each other, so they get rid of associates. Easier and quicker. Thousands are without jobs. Only White and Case in NY has taken the step of getting rid of partners who don't bring in work or don't bill.


PS....In a similar activity, both GM and Chrysler made mistakes closing dealerships. Decreasing market share is a bad thing. Admitting it is a whole different matter.

 

[slaughterj]

By jove I think he's got it. In NYC, partners don't want the fight between each other, so they get rid of associates. Easier and quicker. Thousands are without jobs. Only White and Case in NY has taken the step of getting rid of partners who don't bring in work or don't bill.

It doesn't help that law firms appear to be poorly managed generally as businesses. I suspect this has something to do with rainmakers rise up high and run things (which makes sense to a degree, since they should be involved in managing the work they have accumulated), but rainmaking ability does not equate with managerial ability. Too often I see partners with a big book of business and a correspondingly big attitude end up in charge, to the detriment of the overall operation.

 

[viperdrummer]

It doesn't help that law firms appear to be poorly managed generally as businesses. I suspect this has something to do with rainmakers rise up high and run things (which makes sense to a degree, since they should be involved in managing the work they have accumulated), but rainmaking ability does not equate with managerial ability. Too often I see partners with a big book of business and a correspondingly big attitude end up in charge, to the detriment of the overall operation.

Ok, now it's getting personal........

 

[ViperGeorge]

Not that I agree with this but I listened to 5 hours of CSpan and this is what was said. During congressional hearings the President of Chrysler and the CEO of GM indicated that elimination of badge engineered vehicles would save them billions. I've heard another senior Chrysler exec say the same thing. The story goes that if Chrysler Group LLC had dealers that sold all three brands they would not have to offer badge engineered vehicles, if you want an SUV you buy a Jeep, a minivan? a Chrysler, a performance car? a Dodge. Or something like that. Now in order to provide single brand dealers with products across the entire range of vehicles they offer SUVs in each flavor, ditto for cars and minivans. Changing grills, trim, badges, and the marketing costs for all this add up.

However, it seems to me that they just have to say they're not doing this anymore without closing the dealerships. Tell Dodge only dealers, sorry no minivans or SUVs. Tell Chrysler only dealers, sorry no SUVs. Jeep only dealers already only sell SUVs. This is why so many of the shuttered dealers were single brand dealers.

 

[sun diego]

Chrysler's 'hit list' targets GOP donors

Chuck, did you give to the Republicans and become a target?

 

[slaughterj]

Ok, now it's getting personal........

Haha, I was waiting for you to take the bait!

 

[viperdrummer]

Haha, I was waiting for you to take the bait!

I started to say "I resemble that remark."

 

[slaughterj]

I started to say "I resemble that remark."

Oh no!