Yikes! Chrysler Has At Least A Six Month Supply Of 200's Sitting On Lots

Here we see just one example of a company whose primary purpose is not the creation of products (supply) to meet a demand (consumers *desiring* and purchasing their products), but rather, to keep people employed. That's the important thing? Right? Saving jobs?

And if Chrysler lays people off then it's someone else's fault, right? Someone who is taking our jobs, like illegal aliens and foreigners, or someone who has an unfair advantage, like Mexico with cheap labor, right?

Few people go hmmmm... we're employing masses of people to build products that few people want. But we need to keep on making these undesired products to save jobs. What a dilemma.

Whatever. Back to the illegal aliens, foreigners, and Mexico... and good ol' job creation! How about raising taxes on the products people *DO* want so as to make the unpopular, less expensive ones more appealing? Yeah, that's the ticket! Problem solved!

Says one guy at the back, "How about us making products that people actually want, both domestically and abroad?"

"SHUT UP!" yells the crowd.

Actually FCA is responding to customer demand. When they renewed the UAW contract over a year ago they involved the union and committed to moving production of trucks, SUVs and crossovers to the USA and Canada as that is what that market is demanding. The plant that made the 200 and the Dart is getting hot selling RAM products (some moved from Mexico) and others are getting Jeeps. Jeep is retooling Toledo and hiring more people, not laying people off. An analysis of the 200 and Dart sales showed that it took a lot of $ on the hood to sell them, and that the competitors were also forced to do that. Even Honda puts $1000's on the hood to move Accords. An analysis also showed moving the 200/Dart tooling yielded a very poor return on investment. They can't get enough volume to justify the cost.

Actually - that is the problem TheSteve - the auto manufacturers ARE manufacturing the vehicles that the customers want - they are SUV/CUV/trucks. People are slowing the sales of high volume cars - so the manufacturers do not need to make that many - and putting out rebates to sell cars that take manufacturing space would be stupid - make more of the Suv etc. I doubt that many auto makers make much money on small cars today - and if they cannot be made in Mexico - they surely will not be profitable if made in the USA. THe only thing standing in the way is the gas mileage standards which Donald will no doubt relax.

I could not have said more eloquently. Thank you TheSteve.

I'd fleet sell them and make a modest profit rather than having to throw cash at sales of a dead car.

Rebadge them as Mitsubishis and blow them out at 50% off.

That would be hilarious and just desserts after Chrysler suffering through Mitsicrap for years to have Mitsubishi have to sell Fiatcrap.

The 200 isn't a bad midsize coupe sedan design. It's just been overshadowed by poor performing product that came before it, by more harder competition from GM/Toyota/Ford/etc, & the fact that sedans are the big sellers now that SUVs are way more popular.

Chrysler doesn't even have a (full) brand lineup & no halo or real flagship vehicle to really get consumers interested & into the dealerships to at least look around. Also, the top trim 200's are priced where mid-level 300's are so I would imagine that many consumers interested in a Chrysler sedan are just selecting the bigger car for the same money.

A loaded 200S is nice but a little pricey.