.
Well actually, as they say, reverted back to full Fiat control around 2005. Previously 50/50 with Ferrari and Fiat - although as Ferrari is part of the Fiat empire, sounds very incestuous to me.
Mike
Fiat don't have control - they have ownership. The idea being shared technology with Alfa Romeo will benefit both brands (the 8C Competzione is a direct result). Maserati still have the same technical relationship with Ferrari. It's just handy to have a solvent parent company!
The Daimler Chryrsler merger was for cost cutting reasons and not for technical benefit to Mercedes.
The Daimler Chryrsler merger was for cost cutting reasons and not for technical benefit to Mercedes.
OP
OP
andy_cyp
MB Enthusiast
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2005
- Messages
- 31,091
- Location
- Mittel England
- Car
- Smart ForFour AMG Black Series Night Edition Premium Plus 125 Powered by Brabus
Mrs D shouted aloud this morning as I was leaving for work. I ran upstairs to find her head in her hands...
...she'd just seen that CL in Top Marques!!
hawk20
MB Enthusiast
That is pretty unfair. The Chrysler merger was quite clearly based on a belief that Mercedes could turn Chrysler round and into profit and with them build a really major presence in the US market - a huge market at that. From the data I have seen, one of the major things that killed the project was the fact that there is a much larger number of ex Chrysler workers entitled to health care and pensions, than the size of the current workforce. A crippling overhead and the Unions gradually made it clear that there was no way they were going to allow this to be renegotiated. It is hard to see how the huge current losses can ever be turned round while this millstone remains round the company's neck. Cheaper in many ways to go bust and start again without the problem. GM have similar problems.
