Why were 90s car mergers all so bad?> GMs adventures with Saab, Daewoo and Subaru leading to three dead marques > Ford never making anything smart out of Volvo, Jaguar or Land Rover, losing Mazda in divorce proceedings> BMW-Rover nearly killing the former and killing the latter> Renault-Nissan-Mitsubishi dying a long drawn out death
Not all. VAG getting Skoda, Renault getting Dacia and Hyundai-Kia merger are arguable successes on their business end.
How did you forget this shitshow?
>>28943299only a shitshow because of German arrogance. they got pissy that srt could do cool things, then fucked off with all the money. charger and crossfire still look good today, me412 was goated, and post-split Mercedes is turbo-faggy with all the screens and cheap plastics
What I took away from all of this is that gayrapeans don't actually know how to make good cars
>>28943295I don't know why american brands wasted money on european ones. Chrysler getting in bed directly with daimler was the biggest mistake of them all and directly lead to their bankruptcy. they were more than capable of making desirable and profitable cars on their own as they were already doing in the 80s. even if they lost a shit ton of money, they had tons of it saved up to survive a financial crisis like 2008.ChryslerXMitsubishi however, was fucking GOAT. Mitsubishi let Chrysler make shit like the DSM and didn't care if it undercut their EVO while using EVO parts. they let Chrysler basically rebadge their flagship super car the 3000 GT. even mazda didn't let Ford turn the Rx7 into a Ford. Mitsubishi and Chrysler played on each other's strengths.
>>28943295For the Ford/Jaguar it was because they couldnt fire all the dumbfucks because they didnt have majority shareholder status so all they did was bleed money to a design team that couldnt adapt to Current Year customer desires and they finally just said "fuck it, we're out".Reminder that congress asked the CEOs of GM, Chrysler and Ford "if we give you Billions of dollars, will you stay on for a salary of $1".GM and Chrysler both answered yes.Ford said "I think im good where I'm at".Ford took out loans backed by physical assets and consolodated and continued without accepting government bailout money.
>>28943306>charger and crossfire still look good todayThis is your brain on Chrysler
>>28943479I would agree that the charger looks good, but I'm a sucker for that kind of slop. The crossfire looks decent too, but it's just... Missing something? It's hard to say
>>28943431>DSM3000gt / stealth / GTO are NOT DSMs.They're gray market imports. Massive difference. All of then were built in Nagoya Japan, even the stealth. Whereas true DSMs were made in Illinois. Absolutely agree tho, that Chrysler and mitsubishi was a fantastic choice. It only failed because back then japanese cars was still fairly foreign and the seasoned techs just didn't have enough experience with them.>t. 3000gt schzio
>>28943295>GMs adventures with Saab, Daewoo and Subaru leading to three dead marquesThat's just GM's modus operandi so no surprise there>Ford...JaguarFord should never have bought Jaguar. It was one senior member of the Family that wanted it so it happened. That said, they could have actually consolidated the purchase but for the 90's CEO Jacques Nasser. He had big dreams of building an automotive empire that controlled everything from the manufacture to the recycling of cars. That involved purchasing every damn junkyard they could lay their hands on to the tune of billions. He also wanted what he called the Premier Auto Group, so Ford bought Land Rover and Volvo to go with Jaguar for even more debt. They might have pulled it off but time ran out against a coming recession so they sold it all off including the Mazda shares that went back to the 70's
>>28943905Forgot to include that the biggest reason 2000's Fords sucked was all those billions spent on everything but product and that money had to come from somewhere so they chose to use cheaper parts and cashiering experienced engineers. I contend the company has never truly recovered from that hubris of the 90's.
>90's mergers were bad
>>28943499the grille is higher than you expect, even though it looks complete
>>28943519>3000gt / stealth / GTO are NOT DSMs.if people call a 2014 Challenger a Fiat or Stellantis car despite being made in Brampton and not France or Italy the 3000GT is a DSM
>>28944031what is with this weird revisionist history nonsense where we pretend stellantis existed in 1999?
>>28943479say what you want about the charger but you can bet the germs are crying themselves to sleep every night for bailing out before all the blacks got on social media and started taking out predatory car loans
>>28943295>leading to three dead marquesFour, they got FSO too.
>>28943479thats a cool brainlet, never seen that one beforeit must be old
>>28944043I was thinking more about the profile, honestly. It really just needs *something*
>>28944048OmegakekNo. You can twist yourself into a pretzel, by all means.Doesn't change the FACT: 3/S platform is NOT a DSM. Update your knowledge or remain delulu baby
>>28943449tbf, Alan Mullaly was the best CEO of a major OEM since probably 2000, other than elon. he was well worth his salary
>>28943914imo Ford had a second peak in 2015-2018 when they were still riding the post-Mulally high. Sales peaked, they were best of the domestics in terms of technology, and they offered something for everyone. They ran Fields out the door (who was mid) and replaced him with jim hackett (complete dumbass) and then replaced him with jim farley (a mid dumbass). the CEOs are ultimately just the mouthpiece for the ford family, who are largely incompetent. and only during Mulally’s reign was their nonsense reined in, because they had no other option other than complete bankruptcy.>t. fordfag
>>28943295the 90s is when the whole jumping off began of the new global market really. NAFTA was signed for one, permanently lowering the labor cost for north america and started hollowing out what middle class was left that hadn't already been sucked away by China's labor costs.alot of these multinational companies were probably convinced these merging actions were inevitable, and the merges sought were ones that allowed each company to break into a new locale they didn't have a strong foothold.>GM in korea, europe, japan>Ford in japan and england>renault in japanetc etc
>>28943295Mismanagement and trying to reduce budgets in stupid places (especially in SAABs case for the latter). BMW thought Land Rover would be good purchase to help with making SUVs for the newly emerging market, but discovered British cars were an absolute nightmare and that tech carried over into the X5, with BMW dumping Rover by the next X5 model and dropping a lot of what they learned from Rover (which actually made it considerably more reliable than the first gen).I'm not all that familiar with the rest but I remember the SAAB and BMW/Rover incidents pretty vividly. GM ruining SAAB and pulling the plug will forever piss me off.
>>28943295>Saabwas bankrupt, would've died ten years sooner>Daewoowho gives a shit>Aston/JLRwere bankrupt, would've died without Ford, literally all their modern tech derives from the Ford era because they were too broke to develop anything on their own>Roverbankrupt, would've died ten years earlier>Nissannearly bankrupt, would've diedin every single instance barring the Daimler-Chrysler merger, the companies involved were better off in both the short and long term. You're just a dipshit zoomer who didn't look beyond the wikipedia list of past model production and saw "before GM they made the 9000 and after GM they made a rebadged Subaru, therefore the buyout ruined them"
