7 ms·

I am genuinely curious, why Jeep/Chrysler makes the worst decisions in the car industry over and over again. Is this incompetency or this is really how they run

I am genuinely curious, why Jeep/Chrysler makes the worst decisions in the car industry over and over again. Is this incompetency or this is really how they run their business? I don't know how many years I have known these brands, but they are constantly in the news regarding bankruptcy. I am aware of the history with Mercedes, followed by Fiat, and now with PSA; it feels as though they are the lab rats for all of these foolish decisions and everything that has gone wrong. I guess I'd hammer my infotainment screen if I'd seen such an ad.

lnenad 2y ago
I think in this particular scenario it's shortsightedness. They see this an instant increase in revenue without considering that longer term this will destroy their ever dwindling market share.
- superfist 2y ago
  Because no one rewards long-term efforts. You are rewarded for short-term goals and, at best, mid-term ones. In an abstract sense, customers reward you for long-term efforts, but this is something no one will put in an Excel spreadsheet with financial voodoo calculations, except when you are the sole owner of the business.
  - falcor84 2y ago
    Could this perverse incentive be rectified in some way? Perhaps by offering much of the compensation in equity that they'd have to hold on to for decades?
    - csomar 2y ago
      > Could this perverse incentive be rectified in some way? Yes, the companies will slowly disappear into oblivion with competitors (ie: China) gradually eating their launch.
      - falcor84 2y ago
        What does China actually do differently in this regard? Is there something we can learn from them?
        tekknik 2y ago
        An overreaching government? When you ask “how can we be more like China?” you’ve lost 1/2 the chat…
- mdp2021 2y ago
  > longer term this will destroy their ever dwindling market share I'd very much hope so, but I am seeing humanity adapt to and support much worse terms and conditions, under the banner of "Meh.".
- pmontra 2y ago
  Many C*Os plunder the companies they work for, then move to another one. They don't care about the market share of the company they'll leave, no more than bugs care about a tree they are eating. They'll move to the next one. There is always a next tree, until suddenly there are no more trees nearby.
- KingOfCoders 2y ago
  Sales managers and CEOs make sales, get their options then move on.
bboygravity 2y ago
I have no idea if this is the case here, but one possibility is deliberate coorporate sabotage. Like planting "bad people" on the board or in key positions. Either by competition or by hedge funds that want to short it into the ground ("cellar boxing"). Just incompetency is another option of course.
- nunodonato 2y ago
  "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."
  - franktankbank 2y ago
    Always said with the implication that whatever happened can be "adequately explained by stupidity"...
  - account42 2y ago
    That's a really great guideline ... if you want to help out malicious people. Not everyone deserves the benefit of the doubt.
  - mort96 2y ago
    Why not
  - MrMetric 2y ago
    For corpos, I view things the opposite way: Never attribute to stupidity that which is adequately explained by malice.
    - Anarch157a 2y ago
      For corpos, I attribute it to BOTH. They're malicious AND stupid.
  - sleight42 2y ago
    I like to point out that sufficient stupidity/ignorance can be indistinguishable from malice. Consider it the impact of people living within their bubbles or the result of enormous blindspots.
SpaceL10n 2y ago
Jeep was bought by Stellantis, so I'm giving Jeep the benefit of the doubt. I imagine this terrible, horrible, no good idea, was their idea. The people with the money rarely come up with the good ideas.
- bayindirh 2y ago
  Stellantis is working as a corporations of corporations AFAIK, and they’re free up to a certain degree. However, they have profit targets, and if you fail you’re closed down, again IIRC. So, tracing that decision is a bit harder than it looks.
  - red-iron-pine 2y ago
    didn't their do-nothing CEO, Tavares, just split?
    - bayindirh 2y ago
      Yes, Tavares resigned recently. Hope they become a better company, but their "Revenue increase program via software enabled cars" and what Jeep did with it doesn't inspire confidence, for now.
bloomingkales 2y ago
Every company I've ever been at I've always worked side by side with people from good universities/pedigree. You'd be shocked at how stupid some people are. In fact, it caused a lot of imposter syndrome in me, like ... how did they make it that far? Are they a fraud? Am I? What is happening here. I've lost respect for entire institutions, no joke. You literally will not believe some of the people they created.
danpalmer 2y ago
I don’t know enough about cars or the Jeep brand, but a common answer to this in the general case is market segmentation. If a company constantly makes decisions that make their product worse for you, you’re probably not the target market. Perhaps in this case it means Jeep can sell their cars at a lower price. Perhaps Jeep is already perceived as a budget conscious brand. The market segment they’re targeting may care about that. Kindle does this with their ads. They are targeting a consumer with ~$50 of disposable income to spend on an ebook reader, who would rather pay that little and have ads. I’ll never buy a Kindle because not only do I not want ads on the screen, but they have also neglected their high end device which is the segment of the market where I’m at.
- Aeolun 2y ago
  The moment my Remarkable shows me ads is the moment I burn the company to the ground (reputationally).
- Dalewyn 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - Avshalom 2y ago
    No, you aren't getting ads in your jeep because of woke. Jesus fucking christ.
  - matwood 2y ago
    You're blaming the boneheaded decision of adding ads to a Jeep on DEI? JFC, get off of Twitter and Newsmax already.
    - Dalewyn 2y ago
      Somehow y'all are getting it completely in reverse. Clearly ads in a car is going to alienate certain people, not appeal to them. That's the literal opposite of "diversity" and "inclusion". You and I both hate the mere idea, but it's certainly an interesting idea and if it finds fans for one reason or another (eg: cheaper upfront price tag?) it's a good product whether any of us like it or not.
Pinegulf 2y ago
Pure speculation: Maybe this is an attempt of 'outrage marketing'?
- csomar 2y ago
  It is a car. Most people will spend a good chunk of time and research before they buy a car including researching things like maintenance cost, reliability and resale value.
  - RandomBacon 2y ago
    > Most people Source? I have a feeling it's opposite. Maybe most people here would do that, but most of the general public? Doubtful.
    - bdangubic 2y ago
      100% - most people will buy the brand they had before or buy the car because they like how it looks or buy the car because of the price/special financing... probably like 1% of the people will do some serious research, the rest is like "imma pay $850/month, what cool-looking thing can I get for that"
      - hyperman1 2y ago
        In my surroundings(EU), I see the opposite. Everybody buys their car only after doing serious research. Most people easily swap brands. For most people, driving comfort (we have more/less kids or aging grandparents, so need a bigger/smaller car) is a primary filter. Next is cost, where people are very aware there is not only the price but also the fuel economy and the maintenance. People know very well the parking spots in the city are limited and polluting cars are not allowed in more and more cities, so also look at small size or good enough eco scores. There are exceptions: People getting a car from work spend whatever money they can get, and rich people optimizing for status get a BMW or maybe a Tesla.
      - ptero 2y ago
chneu 2y ago
Jeep customers fall into 2 categories, generally. Folks who want a bare bones 4x4 rig And People who want a grocery SUV that they can take down a gravel road to a trailhead a few times a year and put ducks on the dash. Jeep is definitely targeting the latter group here.

lnenad 2y ago

I think in this particular scenario it's shortsightedness. They see this an instant increase in revenue without considering that longer term this will destroy their ever dwindling market share.

superfist 2y ago
Because no one rewards long-term efforts. You are rewarded for short-term goals and, at best, mid-term ones. In an abstract sense, customers reward you for long-term efforts, but this is something no one will put in an Excel spreadsheet with financial voodoo calculations, except when you are the sole owner of the business.
- falcor84 2y ago
  Could this perverse incentive be rectified in some way? Perhaps by offering much of the compensation in equity that they'd have to hold on to for decades?
  - csomar 2y ago
    > Could this perverse incentive be rectified in some way? Yes, the companies will slowly disappear into oblivion with competitors (ie: China) gradually eating their launch.
    - falcor84 2y ago
      What does China actually do differently in this regard? Is there something we can learn from them?
      - tekknik 2y ago
        An overreaching government? When you ask “how can we be more like China?” you’ve lost 1/2 the chat…
mdp2021 2y ago
> longer term this will destroy their ever dwindling market share I'd very much hope so, but I am seeing humanity adapt to and support much worse terms and conditions, under the banner of "Meh.".
pmontra 2y ago
Many C*Os plunder the companies they work for, then move to another one. They don't care about the market share of the company they'll leave, no more than bugs care about a tree they are eating. They'll move to the next one. There is always a next tree, until suddenly there are no more trees nearby.
KingOfCoders 2y ago
Sales managers and CEOs make sales, get their options then move on.

bboygravity 2y ago

I have no idea if this is the case here, but one possibility is deliberate coorporate sabotage. Like planting "bad people" on the board or in key positions. Either by competition or by hedge funds that want to short it into the ground ("cellar boxing"). Just incompetency is another option of course.

nunodonato 2y ago
"Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."
- franktankbank 2y ago
  Always said with the implication that whatever happened can be "adequately explained by stupidity"...
- account42 2y ago
  That's a really great guideline ... if you want to help out malicious people. Not everyone deserves the benefit of the doubt.
- mort96 2y ago
  Why not
- MrMetric 2y ago
  For corpos, I view things the opposite way: Never attribute to stupidity that which is adequately explained by malice.
  - Anarch157a 2y ago
    For corpos, I attribute it to BOTH. They're malicious AND stupid.
- sleight42 2y ago
  I like to point out that sufficient stupidity/ignorance can be indistinguishable from malice. Consider it the impact of people living within their bubbles or the result of enormous blindspots.

SpaceL10n 2y ago

Jeep was bought by Stellantis, so I'm giving Jeep the benefit of the doubt. I imagine this terrible, horrible, no good idea, was their idea. The people with the money rarely come up with the good ideas.

bayindirh 2y ago
Stellantis is working as a corporations of corporations AFAIK, and they’re free up to a certain degree. However, they have profit targets, and if you fail you’re closed down, again IIRC. So, tracing that decision is a bit harder than it looks.
- red-iron-pine 2y ago
  didn't their do-nothing CEO, Tavares, just split?
  - bayindirh 2y ago
    Yes, Tavares resigned recently. Hope they become a better company, but their "Revenue increase program via software enabled cars" and what Jeep did with it doesn't inspire confidence, for now.

bloomingkales 2y ago

Every company I've ever been at I've always worked side by side with people from good universities/pedigree. You'd be shocked at how stupid some people are. In fact, it caused a lot of imposter syndrome in me, like ... how did they make it that far? Are they a fraud? Am I? What is happening here. I've lost respect for entire institutions, no joke. You literally will not believe some of the people they created.

danpalmer 2y ago

I don’t know enough about cars or the Jeep brand, but a common answer to this in the general case is market segmentation. If a company constantly makes decisions that make their product worse for you, you’re probably not the target market. Perhaps in this case it means Jeep can sell their cars at a lower price. Perhaps Jeep is already perceived as a budget conscious brand. The market segment they’re targeting may care about that. Kindle does this with their ads. They are targeting a consumer with ~$50 of disposable income to spend on an ebook reader, who would rather pay that little and have ads. I’ll never buy a Kindle because not only do I not want ads on the screen, but they have also neglected their high end device which is the segment of the market where I’m at.

Aeolun 2y ago
The moment my Remarkable shows me ads is the moment I burn the company to the ground (reputationally).
Dalewyn 2y ago
[flagged]
- Avshalom 2y ago
  No, you aren't getting ads in your jeep because of woke. Jesus fucking christ.
- matwood 2y ago
  You're blaming the boneheaded decision of adding ads to a Jeep on DEI? JFC, get off of Twitter and Newsmax already.
  - Dalewyn 2y ago
    Somehow y'all are getting it completely in reverse. Clearly ads in a car is going to alienate certain people, not appeal to them. That's the literal opposite of "diversity" and "inclusion". You and I both hate the mere idea, but it's certainly an interesting idea and if it finds fans for one reason or another (eg: cheaper upfront price tag?) it's a good product whether any of us like it or not.

Pinegulf 2y ago

Pure speculation: Maybe this is an attempt of 'outrage marketing'?

csomar 2y ago
It is a car. Most people will spend a good chunk of time and research before they buy a car including researching things like maintenance cost, reliability and resale value.
- RandomBacon 2y ago
  > Most people Source? I have a feeling it's opposite. Maybe most people here would do that, but most of the general public? Doubtful.
  - bdangubic 2y ago
    100% - most people will buy the brand they had before or buy the car because they like how it looks or buy the car because of the price/special financing... probably like 1% of the people will do some serious research, the rest is like "imma pay $850/month, what cool-looking thing can I get for that"
    - hyperman1 2y ago
      In my surroundings(EU), I see the opposite. Everybody buys their car only after doing serious research. Most people easily swap brands. For most people, driving comfort (we have more/less kids or aging grandparents, so need a bigger/smaller car) is a primary filter. Next is cost, where people are very aware there is not only the price but also the fuel economy and the maintenance. People know very well the parking spots in the city are limited and polluting cars are not allowed in more and more cities, so also look at small size or good enough eco scores. There are exceptions: People getting a car from work spend whatever money they can get, and rich people optimizing for status get a BMW or maybe a Tesla.
    - ptero 2y ago

chneu 2y ago

Jeep customers fall into 2 categories, generally. Folks who want a bare bones 4x4 rig And People who want a grocery SUV that they can take down a gravel road to a trailhead a few times a year and put ducks on the dash. Jeep is definitely targeting the latter group here.