Friday, March 23, 2007

Kicking the tires on Chrysler

I think the FP is right in thinking that a Magna bid would be a prelude to a break-up of Chrysler. (HT) Quote:
"Mr. Stronach has stressed, however, that Magna does not want to risk losing the business of its major customers, namely Ford Motor Co. and General Motors Corp. by competing directly with them. Taking an ownership position in Chrysler may put it in that situation. A more likely outcome is that Magna would invest in Chrysler’s vehicle production operations in a way that’s palatable for Magna’s main clients."
This whole move has made me question whether this is more than simply one company picking over the carcass of another one. The auto industry is home to some of the most powerful brands in the world - nameplates from Lexus to Chevrolet bring an instant association. In many industries though, big brands don't make anything anymore, it's all contracted out. The only things that Nike owns (aside from its offices and retail outlets) is the swoosh and the name. Same thing, so I understand, with most apparel manufacturers.

Is it possible for the auto industry to be divided similarly. On one hand there'd be the brands and their dealer networks, on the other hand, there'd be manufacturing and distribution networks. Some companies might remain vertically integrated, but most of them would simply contract out their manufacturing. Magna already does this for DaimlerChrysler in Austria where they assemble SUV's. I'm not an economist, or a business major, but is this plausible? What are the implications for all those unionized auto-worker jobs in Ontario? What are the implications for new vehicle prices?

Labels: , , ,