It Sounds Like Dodge And Chrysler Might Get The Help They Need

All I’ve ever wanted is for the now-Stellantis brands to live up to their potential. It’s not about getting specific vehicles (I can accept that the Hellcat-powered Pacifica probably ain’t happening). These are important carmakers, and each has a role in the greater marketplace. In particular, I’ve harped a lot on Stellantis for letting Chrysler and Dodge wither on the vine, but it comes from a place of caring.

It’s why a new report hinting that Stellantis may be trying to help those brands out is music to my ears. This is good news, and I’m feeling like I need to make The Morning Dump a little more positive after Archie Manning disappointed the Longhorn faithful again this weekend.

Other good news? Well, it sounds like the White House might be considering offsetting tariff costs for manufacturers who build cars in the United States. What’s that going to look like? No one knows! How will that work? See the previous answer.

BYD doesn’t have to worry about U.S. tariffs at the moment, and it can now officially celebrate besting Tesla for four straight quarters in EV sales. In five years, that might look like when the Red Sox beat up on the Astros earlier this season. It doesn’t matter anymore!

And, finally, Genesis has established itself as a real player in the luxury space. The next move? Show it can build a performance identity.

How To Fix Stellantis, Redux

I have never been even partially responsible for a company that’s built a car. When David finishes the Jeep, I suppose that’ll change. Until then, I understand why you’d wonder where I get off telling car execs what they’re doing wrong. Sure. Fair.

Though, in the case of Stellantis, I specifically pointed out all the reasons why I thought the company was in bad shape, even after reporting huge profits. Stellantis shuffled off its CEO less than a year later, for many of the reasons that I identified, and the company has swung from big profits to losses.

I think I like the new guy, Anthonio Filosa, or at the very least, I think he’s saying the right things and deserves some time to try and get it right. According to a new report from Bloomberg, he’s maybe going to get a lot right:

Stellantis NV is planning to invest about $10 billion in the US as the troubled maker of Jeep sport utility vehicles and Ram pickups refocuses on the market that’s pivotal to its profits, according to people familiar with the situation.

The carmaker may announce in the coming weeks about $5 billion in fresh money on top of a similar amount earmarked earlier in the year, said the people, who declined to be identified discussing information that’s not public. The investments over several years could be funneled into plants — including re-openings, hiring and new models — in states such as Illinois and Michigan, the people said.

Stellantis is focused on reclaiming the past success of the Jeep brand and is considering fresh investments into Dodge, which could result in a new Dodge V8 muscle car, and possibly even the Chrysler brand in the long term, some of the people said. Talks are ongoing, no final decision has been made and the amount and targeted projects could still change, the people said.

I guess it’s time to play the “Re-Build Stellantis Plan Waltz” one more time:

• Jeep: A top and bottom approach. The most important brand, so give engineers more money and fight back against Bronco with a more modern Wrangler. At the same time, more volume hybrids that looks good.
• Ram: I still think putting it under Dodge is smart, but in lieu of that: A midsize hybrid truck, which the company has basically said will happen.
• Dodge: Muscle car? Sure. A replacement for the Durango is also key, and an entry-level crossover that can compete with the HR-Vs of the world. Maybe something French?
• Chrysler: Literally, anything that’s not a van. More specifically, make it your luxury brand, build a luxury car and a luxury SUV. And, when you do that, you should also…
• Kick The Italian Brands Out Of The US: You can’t do everything at once. Sergio’s dream was a great dream, but it wasn’t implemented properly. Sell Maserati (I know, I know, “it’s not for sale,” but sell it). Keep Alfa for Europe. Keep Fiat for Europe. I don’t care what you do with Lancia.
• Keep Peugeot And Citroën, Dump DS: I love the French brands, and I can’t pretend like I don’t (I probably am emotionally invested in Lancia’s outcome a little). The French government owns a big chunk of the company, so there’s really no choice here. I’d dump DS, but if you get rid of Maserati then maybe DS can do what Chrysler is going to do in the United States (no V8s for Europe, though).
• Leapmotor: Seems fine!

This gets way more complicated in practice.

Obviously, the UAW loves this plan. The White House is going to love this plan. The Italian government is going to hate it. You can’t make everyone happy, and Stellantis doesn’t have unlimited money.

After a lot of back-and-forth, the Tavares-run Stellantis committed itself to spending more in Europe. But with the company cutting back across the continent due to overcapacity, I don’t get how that’s going to work.

It sounds like Filosa is going to meet with the Italian unions later this month. Oh, to be a mosca on that wall.

The Anti-Inflation White House Allegedly Wants To Address Car Price Inflation

Inflation became such a bad word that President Biden named his signature piece of legislation the Inflation Reduction Act. I’m not sure how much reduction of inflation actually occurred, and it’s clear that the price of eggs had a lot to do with the election of President Trump.

Tariffs are historically inflationary, and it’s only a matter of time before companies raise prices to offset tariffs. Unless, unless… the White House does something to reverse or offset them.

Here’s Senator Bernie Moreno–a car dealer–explaining how this might work in a Reuters exclusive:

“The signal to the car companies around the world is look, you have final assembly in the U.S.: we’re going to reward you,” Moreno said in an interview. “For Ford, for Toyota, for Honda, for Tesla, for GM, those are the almost in order the top five domestic content vehicle producers – they’ll be immune to tariffs.”

[…]

Moreno added automakers with significant final production in the United States should get tariff breaks: “Look, at the end of the day, they’re doing exactly we want them to do – paying employees in America well and doing final assembly in the United States with the cars that they sell here.”

Asked for comment on the proposal, a White House official told Reuters that Trump and the administration “are committed to a nuanced and multi-faceted approach to securing domestic auto and auto parts production. Until any official action is signed by the president, however, any discussion about administration policymaking is speculative.”

I love the “almost in order” there. I guess it depends on which measure you’re looking at, but I assume somewhere in Senator Moreno’s mind he was aware that this is not the correct order. It doesn’t really matter because the concept is sound. If you want more manufacturing in the United States, then the automakers who build here should get some sort of tariff relief.

What this means in Realityville is another question.

The biggest sticking point is probably Canada and Mexico. President Trump clearly doesn’t love that there’s production in those places, but he was the one who wrote the most recent treaty (USCMA) that continued to make it efficient for companies to do so…

Will automakers like Toyota and Honda get a 1:1 discount on imported cars for every car built here? Or are automakers going to get a break if there’s “final assembly” and that means some parts made in Canada are fine? One of the biggest obstacles to building cars efficiently in the United States is the steel and aluminum tariffs, so will automakers get a break from that?

Again, the form that this takes is extremely important.

I’m torn on how to think about some of this. On one hand, President Biden and the Democrats have made a big deal out of bringing manufacturing back to the United States, and no small portion of the plants that carmakers are bragging about are ones that were already going to be built because of Biden-era policies. On the other hand, Democrats seemed mostly content to let the USMCA status quo continue (they might argue that one way to slow cross-border immigration is improve Mexico’s economy and allow more jobs there).

It likely makes sense for automakers to shift as much manufacturing here from overseas as they can because Democrats will probably take credit for the plants being built/planned if they somehow win back the White House in a few years. You think any Democrat President, on the off chance it happens, is going to ship the jobs back?

BYD Beats Tesla For Fourth Straight Quarter

Tesla v. BYD is potentially not the best framing for the Chinese car market over the long term, but it has some value in the moment. The fact that BYD has now gone a year straight selling more electric cars globally is a not-small detail, especially given that BYD doesn’t have the same market access that Tesla has.

It’s also interesting because Tesla and BYD both seem in trouble in China according to this Bloomberg article:

BYD is losing momentum in its home market, where policymakers are increasingly concerned about destructive competition. Tesla will have trouble replicating last quarter’s showing now that the US has phased out federal tax credits supporting EV purchases.

China’s government has sought to temper cutthroat competitive practices in the world’s biggest car market, where manufacturers have waged a relentless price war since early 2023. BYD has been at the fore of the discounting trend and in late August reported a surprise 30% drop in quarterly profit.

Both BYD and Tesla are more than capable of overcoming these challenges, although only BYD seems truly interested in building better cars. Tesla seems more into robots right now.

‘Driving Control, Precision, And Confidence’ Will Define The Future Of Genesis Performance Cars

The larger automaker known as Hyundai went on a bit of a buying spree about a decade ago, bringing on some of the best designers and engineers from peak-era Germany. It’s how we ended up with the guy behind the best M cars tuning Velosters, and the guy who designed some of the best Audis, transforming Genesis into a real luxury player.

The Hyundai N cars are never quite the fastest, but damn if they don’t just feel right.

Genesis also has a host of highly competitive vehicles (I encouraged a friend to test one, and he fell in love), but it’s apparently not enough to merely make nice cars. What’s missing, according to the company, is a sense of true performance. That’s where the company’s Magma performance brand comes in.

BTW, let’s please recognize how metal that name is: MAGMA. I’m pretty sure I saw them open for Rob Zombie at L’Amour.

A big part of MAGMA’s mission will be planned by Manfred Harrer, head of the Vehicle Development Technology Unit at Hyundai (and ex- of Porsche, BMW, Audi, Apple…). Here’s what he told Automotive News what’s key to making this work:

“In my eyes, we have one gap with the brand and the brand image, and that’s the performance part,” Harrer said in a separate interview at the automaker’s Namyang R&D center south of Seoul.

“And this should be covered by our new Genesis Magma lineup.”

Part of the Magma proposition will be raw power and torque, acceleration and top speed, Harrer said. But the differentiator, he said, will be driving control, precision and confidence.

“This is the philosophy, from an engineering standpoint,” said Harrer, who previously worked on Apple’s discontinued electric vehicle project and earlier at Porsche, BMW and Audi. “It’s the preciseness and controllability of the powerful engines in these powerful cars.”

I like the way that sounds. Pure power is getting super boring, and while it’s not like AMG is just handing out 1,000 HP cars (that’s what SRT is for), I think N is a good example of Hyundai prioritizing feel over numbers.

What I’m Listening To While Writing TMD

If you don’t have a daughter or, maybe, you don’t have ears, you may be unaware there’s another Taylor Swift album that just dropped on Friday. I don’t love it. I respect that she puts out a bunch of music and tries things. It’s also not really for me, sure, but as an enjoyer of the odd pop tune, I don’t think it’s doing anything new. Both the latest Sabrina Carpenter and Charli XCX album feel like they’re doing a lot more.

Oh, right. Sabrina Carpenter shows up on this album on the titular track and is predictably one of the better ones. The best song on the album thus far is probably “Actually Romantic.” People who care more than I do seem to think this is about Charli XCX, and I think that’s probably right (inasmuch as the song is about any one person and not about a few individuals, like the people in New York Magazine).

I suppose Charli fired the first shot with “Sympathy is a Knife,” but that song feels like less of a diss track and more just an artist sharing her own feelings of inadequacy? This kinda feels like punching down. Also, it’s pop music, it doesn’t matter.

The Big Question

What should Jeep do with the money?

Top photo: Chrysler