Fiat Chrysler proposes merger with Renault, would be third-largest automaker - Diamond-Star Motors 2.0

Fiat Chrysler proposed on Monday to merge with France's Renault to create the world's third-biggest automaker and combine their investments in the race to make new electric and autonomous vehicles.

The merged company would reshape the global industry: it would make some 8.7 million vehicles a year, leapfrogging General Motors and trailing only Volkswagen and Toyota.

Shares of both companies jumped over 10% on the news of the offer, which would see each side's shareholders split ownership in the new manufacturer.

Renault welcomed the idea. The company's board met Monday at its headquarters outside Paris to discuss the proposal and said afterward that Renault will study it "with interest." In a statement, Renault said such a fusion could "improve Renault's industrial footprint and be a generator of additional value for the Alliance" with Japan's Nissan and Mitsubishi.

Fiat Chrysler's offer comes at a key moment for Renault. The French manufacturer had reportedly wanted to merge with Nissan, but those plans were derailed by the arrest of boss Carlos Ghosn on financial misconduct charges in Japan.

Now, questions are growing over the Renault-Nissan-Mitsubishi alliance , which is the biggest maker of passenger cars in the world. While Fiat Chrysler says the merger with Renault would accommodate the alliance and lead to savings for them, it is unclear how the Japanese companies might react in the longer term to being tied to a much larger partner.

A deal would save 5 billion euros ($5.6 billion) for the merged companies each year by sharing research, purchasing costs and other activities, Fiat Chrysler said in a statement. It said the deal would involve no plant closures, but didn't address potential job cuts.

The companies are largely complementary: Fiat Chrysler is stronger in the U.S. and SUV markets, while Renault is stronger in Europe and on electric vehicle developments. Together, they would be worth almost $40 billion euros.

Analysts at financial firm Jefferies said it was "hard to disagree with the logic" of the deal as there is a strong fit in the markets each company covers and the brands they offer.
"The elephant in the room is who will run the entity," analysts Philippe Houchois and Himanshu Agarwal wrote in a note to investors.

Mergers of equals can be difficult to manage over questions of who gets the top leadership positions and which brands are promoted and invested in most. A tie-up between Daimler and Chrysler in the 1990s was billed as a merger of equals, but it collapsed nine years later amid cultural differences and recriminations.

Investors were nevertheless enthusiastic, pushing shares in Fiat Chrysler up 11% and Renault 14% in European trading.

The French government, which owns 15% of Renault, said it is "favorable" to the idea of a merger with Fiat Chrysler but wants to study its conditions more carefully, especially in terms of "Renault's industrial development" and employees' working conditions, government spokeswoman Sibeth Ndiaye said.

Such a merger would show "our capacity to respond to European and French sovereignty challenges in a globalized context," she said. "We need giants to be built in Europe."

Collaboration between automakers has taken on greater importance in recent years as they seek to build their technological capabilities in pursuit of electrical vehicles, net connectivity and artificial intelligence for vehicles. Automakers are also under pressure from regulators , particularly in Europe and China, to come up with electric vehicles so they can meet tougher climate change regulations and after scandals over the amount of pollutants engines truly emit.

The merger idea is the biggest corporate move so far by Fiat Chrysler CEO Mike Manley, who took his position after the unexpected death of the charismatic leader Sergio Marchionne last year.

What happens to jobs is likely to be a source of concern.

France's influential CGT union warned against cuts should a deal go through, and said it wants the French government to retain a blocking stake in any new company.

Matteo Salvini, the leader of Italy's rightwing populist League party and the deputy premier, said that "if Fiat grows, it is good news for Italy and Italians," though he warned a deal should protect "every single job."

In Tokyo, Nissan CEO Hiroto Saikawa wouldn't comment directly on the idea of the deal but said, "I am always open to exchanging constructive views on strengthening the alliance."
 
After all this chris-chan merger shit my brain couldn't process the article headline until I clicked.
 
If we're going by what I know of each company here...
Fiat, probably garbage. To be fair my only meaningful experiences with Fiats have been old Fiat Spiders and those stupid-looking little Fiat 500s.
Chrysler, variable but has put out some real fucking turkeys. Mopar electricals are generally a fucking nightmare. That being said, one of my favorite vehicles ever was a Dodge 3/4 ton pickup (which ate ECMs and wiring harnesses like fucking candy).
Renault? Every Renault I've seen stateside is fucking trash. That isn't many, to be fair.
 
Anything made by Fiat Chrysler is horrible, even their Jeeps, which used to be a good brand under the corperation in the past. I've seen too many Dodge Charger Police Pursuits blow up, Dodge Minivans peter out, Durangos & Rams on the side of the road, and commercial vans of theirs fuck up to count.
 
Última edición:
Anything made my Fiat Chrysler is horrible, even their Jeeps, which used to be a good brand under the corperation in the past. I've seen too many Dodge Charger Police Pursuits blow up, Dodge Minivans peter out, Durangos & Rams on the side of the road, and commercial vans of theirs fuck up to count.
From what I've heard of Jeeps they were good when they were owned by AMC but are now just an overpriced luxury brand.

Then again my family doesn't have the highest opinion of Ford vehicles either.* My old man charmingly refers to them as Found On Road Dead *
 
Anything made my Fiat Chrysler is horrible, even their Jeeps, which used to be a good brand under the corperation in the past. I've seen too many Dodge Charger Police Pursuits blow up, Dodge Minivans peter out, Durangos & Rams on the side of the road, and commercial vans of theirs fuck up to count.
Honestly the only member of the Big Three I can't call "crappy" is GM and that's because I have basically zero experience with GM stuff. Fomoco? A lot of old Ford pickups have serious issues with oil getting to where it fucking needs to get to, and it's probably a problem their cars have had as well. There was also the fact that old Pintos and Mustangs were fucking fireballs waiting to happen, and some of their more recent models (Explorers) have fucking terrible transmission issues.

At least Mopar had the nigh-on unkillable slant six. The 318 V8 was nearly as difficult to kill, and the 383 V8 was fucking amazing for a non-hemi.
 
Maybe it's because I'm not an American and not too familiar with the car industry, but I honestly thought that Chrysler didn't exist anymore. I thought it had went the way of Oldsmobile and Pontiac, like it was a brand that was big decades ago but had been retired. The only recent car they have made I can think of is the PT Cruiser, and even those have started disappearing from the roads. Could anyone enlighten me as to what Chrysler actually makes?
 
Honestly the only member of the Big Three I can't call "crappy" is GM and that's because I have basically zero experience with GM stuff. Fomoco? A lot of old Ford pickups have serious issues with oil getting to where it fucking needs to get to, and it's probably a problem their cars have had as well. There was also the fact that old Pintos and Mustangs were fucking fireballs waiting to happen, and some of their more recent models (Explorers) have fucking terrible transmission issues.

At least Mopar had the nigh-on unkillable slant six. The 318 V8 was nearly as difficult to kill, and the 383 V8 was fucking amazing for a non-hemi.
GMC is unequivocal garbage, my guy. Shit falls apart in all sorts of interesting ways.
 
Maybe it's because I'm not an American and not too familiar with the car industry, but I honestly thought that Chrysler didn't exist anymore. I thought it had went the way of Oldsmobile and Pontiac, like it was a brand that was big decades ago but had been retired. The only recent car they have made I can think of is the PT Cruiser, and even those have started disappearing from the roads. Could anyone enlighten me what Chrysler actually makes?
Chrysler's still around. For a bit they were hooked up with the people who make Mercedes-Benzes (and they were known as Daimler-Chrysler). I think that kind of fell apart, though. Chrysler used to have Plymouth as kind of a Mopar counterpart to Fomoco's Mercury (think: cheap shit), but Plymouth's dead and gone. They acquired AMC a while back and turned them into Eagle (which is dead by now as well) and also acquired the rights to anything Jeep a while ago (probably by buying whoever the fuck bought Willys back in the day?). Chrysler does not have anywhere NEAR the robust export/international market that Fomoco does or GM does (GM uses Holden in places like Australia, for example, and I think they might be tied to Opel somehow?) so you're probably not going to see much Mopar shit outside North America, if I had to guess.

To my knowledge Mopar makes mostly shit like the Caravan minivan under the Dodge badge, and those are fairly common. PT Cruiser is out of production, I think. The Durango SUV is still being made, and the new Chrysler 300 is pretty common among people who want to pretend they're something more than lower-middle class. I think Chrysler also basically owns Freightliner, which makes big goddamn trucks.
 
Honestly the only member of the Big Three I can't call "crappy" is GM and that's because I have basically zero experience with GM stuff. Fomoco? A lot of old Ford pickups have serious issues with oil getting to where it fucking needs to get to, and it's probably a problem their cars have had as well. There was also the fact that old Pintos and Mustangs were fucking fireballs waiting to happen, and some of their more recent models (Explorers) have fucking terrible transmission issues.

At least Mopar had the nigh-on unkillable slant six. The 318 V8 was nearly as difficult to kill, and the 383 V8 was fucking amazing for a non-hemi.

GM also had some really crappy cars back then, the GM ignition switch fiasco, where car ignitions can switch to the off position while running, comes to mind. The infamous VTi transmissions used in the early 2000 Saturn models (Ion, VUE) were complete garbage as well.

Another awful transmission that Ford used was the infamous PowerShift Transmission in the Focus and Fiesta (some people even jokingly call it PowerShudder or PowerShit), which drove away a lot of people from those cars, and then only recently Ford decides to stop selling those here in the US.
 
Última edición:
From what I've heard of Jeeps they were good when they were owned by AMC but are now just an overpriced luxury brand.
Ironically part of that period was when Renault had stake in the company. The Franco-American Motors stuff wasn't bad. The only mistake I can think of was putting that shitty Peugeot BA10/5 transmission in the XJ Cherokees. The Renix system on the 4.0L isn't popular either. But I think that's more of a familiarity issue.
A lot of old Ford pickups have serious issues with oil getting to where it fucking needs to get to, and it's probably a problem their cars have had as well.
Trucks ran a multitude of engines of all different designs (Flathead, Y-block, I6, FT, Windsor, 335, Lima, IDI, etc). Can't really lay all their problems on the debate between top-oiler versus side-oiler FE/FTs in the 1960's.
 
Trucks ran a multitude of engines of all different designs (Flathead, Y-block, I6, FT, Windsor, 335, Lima, IDI, etc). Can't really lay all their problems on the debate between top-oiler versus side-oiler FE/FTs in the 1960's.
Eh, fair enough. The Ford 260/289/302 were all reasonably solid smallblock V8s, to be honest (though I remember someone badmouthing more highly-tuned 302s). I also remember that either the Windsor or the Cleveland (?) were considered pretty crapola, but I can't remember which.
 
Yet whatever they put out gets destroyed by a Toyota.

How can white boys even compete?
Toyotas are good, for the most part. Some issues here and there, but I loved the shit out of old Celicas, and someone in my family had an '80 Toyota pickup that absolutely WOULD. NOT. DIE. Hondas are even better on average but they're fucking expensive.
 
Toyotas are good, for the most part. Some issues here and there, but I loved the shit out of old Celicas, and someone in my family had an '80 Toyota pickup that absolutely WOULD. NOT. DIE. Hondas are even better on average but they're fucking expensive.
Their trucks last and everything is overbuilt, just look at what a used 10 year old Landcruiser goes for, hell you can buy 30 year old ones still.
 
Eh, fair enough. The Ford 260/289/302 were all reasonably solid smallblock V8s, to be honest (though I remember someone badmouthing more highly-tuned 302s). I also remember that either the Windsor or the Cleveland (?) were considered pretty crapola, but I can't remember which.
The Windsor is the 289/302/351W. That's what the W stands for. To distinguish it from the 351 Cleveland.

I think what you are thinking of is the 400 cid 335 "Modified Cleveland" engine which is not highly regarded. Probably because it was just a boring truck/large car engine and never got any factory or aftermarket go-fast parts. 2-barrel carbs were standard. Low compression. Smogged to bejeesus and back because lol 70's. They have some odd quirks as well like non-adjustable valve lash and stuff. But if you just run and use them like a truck engine they are perfectly fine for the job.
 
Atrás
Top Abajo