Welcome Guest. ( logon | register )   
FAQ Member List Albums Today's Posts Search

PointedThree :  Community forums : General Mercedes-Benz Discussions : Daimler-Benz again?

Page 2 of 2 12
Daimler-Benz again?
Topic Tools Message Format
Author
Posted 5/14/2007 9:08 PM
Marsden
Classic MB




Date registered: Apr 2006
Location: Capital City USA
Vehicle(s): Mercedes-Benz
5000
RE: Daimler-Benz again?

iNeon - 5/14/2007 6:51 PM You read, but you didn't listen. I said that they needed to learn how to build a car as cheaply built as the 163 was-- that's where Chrysler came in. Benz did a HORRENDOUS job starting the ML-Class line. They couldn't even get trim problems sorted out until well into the product's lifecycle, let alone the electrical issues. Chrysler never affected established Mercedes-Benz products in a negative way. Chrysler's people and technology helped perfect the w163 and to iron out the issues inherent in an all-new "German" econoSUV. Chrysler's people gave Benz most of their new product ideas and Chrysler's people tuned/massaged the w210 hand-me-downs in such a way that Benz is using it on their next E. "Engineered like no other.." my ass. The truth of this whole matter is that when it was DCX, the Germans funneled money away from Chrysler operations to prop-up their own economic shortcomings. They, themselves, badmouthed their little brothers, making it even harder for Chrysler to have any semblance of a good reputation. The Germans Touted their 'engineering' and Chrysler sales plummeted as a result. The Germans forced Chrysler to use their own substandard parts, lowering our reliability while simultaneously raising costs to consumers. Daimler is holding quite a bit of the Dodge trucks in this deal, and that just cements what I was saying originally-- THEY ONLY WANTED CHRYSLER SO THEY COULD LEARN TO BUILD GOOD CHEAP CARS AND TRUCKS. Nothing more. When Benz is in the same situation they are now in 5 years-- don't blame Chrysler. Your guys in Stuttgart ARE at fault for all of this. Chrysler was on the up-and-up when they were accquired and they couldn't be better off now. Good riddance indeed.

Neon, nearly every sentence in that post is an unsupported assertion.

You're more than welcome to your opinion, of course,
but you're unlikely to convince anyone else that way...even with all caps...

 



Edited by Marsden 5/14/2007 9:09 PM
#74374 - in reply to #74248
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Author
Posted 5/14/2007 9:45 PM
Marsden
Classic MB




Date registered: Apr 2006
Location: Capital City USA
Vehicle(s): Mercedes-Benz
5000
RE: Another Article on the Same Subject

The proposed deal calls for forming a new company to assume Chrysler's pension and health-care liabilities, in which Daimler would hold a minority stake...

Cerberus, which is based in New York, made its name in the 1990s and earlier this decade as a buyer of bad loans around the world, foreclosing or settling the debts at a profit through hard-nosed tactics. Then it slowly moved into buying whole companies in countries like Germany and Japan that were struggling with high costs or bloated work forces. After acquiring these companies, it swiftly slashed costs, laid off workers and closed factories, shifting production to lower-cost spots in Asia. Though many industries in the U.S. and Europe are making similar moves, buyers like Cerberus typically make profits by drastically speeding up the process...

What worries me is the possibility that the health-plan-and-pension liabilities will be spun off into an entity which will not have the financial resources to survive, and the good old American Taxpayer will be left holding the bag, through mechanisms such as thePension Benefit Guaranty Corporation...

 

Because of franchise laws, auto makers can't force dealers to close, and buying them out is costly. GM spent $2 billion to eliminate dealers to get rid of its Oldsmobile brand.

Automobile dealers are right behind developers and real-estate agents in the degree of control they have over state legislatures...

#74378 - in reply to #74277
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Author
Posted 5/15/2007 12:12 AM
iNeon

Date registered: Dec 1899
Location:
Vehicle(s):
RE: Daimler-Benz again?

You're right. Mercedes-Benz and Chrysler weren't a match from the beginning.

They merged, though, and we all have to get over it. If there was never any good in Chrysler, I don't see why Benz would have merged with them. The information we have isn't yet complete, but trusted sources say that the Germans do have great interest in our trucks. It can't be coincidence that the merge happened 3 years after we introduced the most influential truck in recent history, and directly following the launch of the problem-riddled w163. All these years later they're retaining financial interest in our large vehicles-- Why?

It can't be that it's all on Chrysler. They've never had a problem until recently, and that could be traced to the higher-ups(in Germany) giving them the green light on yet another SUV. What about the neon replacement they never let us build so they could engineer, and then scrap ANOTHER repackaged Benz(second-gen Crossfire) with a winged seal on the grille? Why can't youall accept that the American public just wouldn't buy automobiles with diluted designs and expensive German parts? Those weren't Chrysler's choices and it simply isn't fair to we faithful to say it was because Chrysler can't build a car worth having. It's because we weren't allowed by Father Benz to build a car that competed with his.
#74382 - in reply to #74248
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Author
Posted 5/15/2007 2:50 AM
BenzDieselTuner

Date registered: Dec 1899
Location:
Vehicle(s):
RE: Daimler-Benz again?

iNeon - 5/15/2007 12:12 AM

You're right. Mercedes-Benz and Chrysler weren't a match from the beginning.

They merged, though,



WRONG!

Chrysler was BOUGHT, CHEAP by Daimler-Benz AG.........

no one "merged"

#74388 - in reply to #74382
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Author
Posted 5/15/2007 3:16 AM
iNeon

Date registered: Dec 1899
Location:
Vehicle(s):
RE: Daimler-Benz again?

A merge of equals?
#74392 - in reply to #74248
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Author
Posted 5/15/2007 6:59 AM
AsianML

Date registered: Dec 1899
Location:
Vehicle(s):
RE: Daimler-Benz again?

iNeon - 5/15/2007 3:16 AM A merge of equals?
Nope. That's what they said, but Daimler-Benz bought Chrysler Corporation.
#74412 - in reply to #74392
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Author
Posted 5/15/2007 12:26 PM
iNeon

Date registered: Dec 1899
Location:
Vehicle(s):
RE: Daimler-Benz again?

It's mostly semantics anyway. Changing merged for bought gives it the same meaning.

Let's see how they're both doing in 5 Years. I'm done with this.
#74432 - in reply to #74248
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Author
Posted 5/15/2007 4:03 PM
AsianML

Date registered: Dec 1899
Location:
Vehicle(s):
RE: Daimler-Benz again?

iNeon - 5/15/2007 12:26 PM It's mostly semantics anyway. Changing merged for bought gives it the same meaning. Let's see how they're both doing in 5 Years. I'm done with this.
You take it so personal.
#74453 - in reply to #74432
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Author
Posted 5/15/2007 4:49 PM
iNeon

Date registered: Dec 1899
Location:
Vehicle(s):
RE: Daimler-Benz again?

So I ought to watch and cheer as a company that's provided my family safe, reliable, *affordable* transportation my entire life fades into oblivion whenever the Germans that put them where they are rest on laureled stars?

Being indifferent is not my strong suit.

It may be business as usual for all of you, but I refuse to support such practices-- be it with my wallet or otherwise.
#74471 - in reply to #74248
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Author
Posted 6/18/2007 8:06 AM
Wolfgang

Date registered: Dec 1899
Location:
Vehicle(s):
RE: Daimler-Benz again?

iNeon - 5/15/2007 1:49 PM

So I ought to watch and cheer as a company that's provided my family safe, reliable, *affordable* transportation my entire life fades into oblivion whenever the Germans that put them where they are rest on laureled stars?

Being indifferent is not my strong suit.

It may be business as usual for all of you, but I refuse to support such practices-- be it with my wallet or otherwise.



Tom Gale is coming back.

http://www.brophy.com/eodweb/htmls/designers/gale.htm




Edited by Wolfgang 6/18/2007 8:13 AM
#79249 - in reply to #74471
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Author
Posted 9/17/2007 4:20 AM
imike24

Date registered: Dec 1899
Location:
Vehicle(s):
RE: Daimler-Benz again?

Cool. Thank for sharing
__________________
stretcher extenders semen enhancers hair removal breast enlarger penishealth volumepills fengshui


Edited by imike24 9/17/2007 4:21 AM
#89029 - in reply to #74248
Top of the page Bottom of the page
« View previous thread :: View next thread »
Page 2 of 2 12
Forum Jump :
All times are EST.  The time is now 8:01:42 PM.

Execution: 0.265 seconds, 77 cached, 24 executed.