EVEN ITALIANS DO NOT DRIVE ITALIAN

[Thomas Herbsthofer]

Just back from Rome and Milano I was astonished to see german, french, swedish and japanese cars
dominating the autostrade. From the new italian cars the Stilo Wagon, the Multipla, the Punto, the Lybra, Y sometimes appear. Thesis, 166, 156, Phedra are very rare.

For me this shows clearly, that crisis of FIAT started with ignorance of the management when they did not put any reaction in the past years when domestic sales in Italy dropped.

Asking my friends and colleagues in Italy, why they select foreign cars, they immediately say : QUALITY.

Lets hope, that the Geneva - cars put new force into FIAT group!

[Julian H. Tice]

Cars and people:horses for courses.

First of all we all know that brands are specifically linked to core values. The sort of people who buy Alfa Romeo or Lancia are not the sort of people who buy the teutonic offerings. You have to give credit to the Italians for consistently pumping out brave designs, both technologically and aesthetically - the world would be a poorer place without common-rail diesel and Lambo. Countach, Ferrari F40, Lancia Stratos... even the humble Barchetta.

Point two: There is a good reason why there are not many luxo-barges in Italy - TAX. I am not sure of the exact rates in Italy but I live in Portugal where the system is the same. Take a new 3.0 Thesis for example. Price key in hand in Belguim: €44,000. Price in Portugal: €70,000. Many models are not even comercialised in these countries and the favoured ones are the low c.c. (c.c.´s are the basis of the tax) with high output.

[Thomas Herbsthofer]

Julian, you are right - however in the past there was maybe 50% ore more marketshare for italian cars in Italy.

Idon`t estimate italians have lost their feeling for good design and the true "macchina", but what I was told
even italians are fed up from problems with quality. And if Fiat shares same price with VW or Audi etc.
they select a car where they expect less troubles on the road.

I am sure Fiat management didnot carefully enough listen to the homemarket, so came loss of market
in Italy and intruding of the others filling the gaps Fiat opened.

[Julian H. Tice]

True... all true,

I suppose that I suffer from a rather rose tinted view of the "good" years of the autombile industry, when brands had developing images, often cast by one person (Lancia, Ferrari....) and style and mechanical development was fast. La Dolce Vita. The brave new world of corporate committee designs and cost factoring goes rather against that. Cars for A to B, Ok - but automobiles?

Thankfully, there are signs that the two worlds can co-exist. Audi´s stewardship of Lamborginhi seems to be panning out and Lotus has managed to maintain its status despite being passed around. It is just kind of sad that we will always be talking about niche products when it comes to stylistic and production independence. Of course this is all down to cost - the automobile industry is one of the most competitve in the world with profit margins always fluctuating in and out of the red. People aren´t prepared to pay for more choice. As an economist I would equate this to monopolistic competition being squeezed down to perfect competiton: there just exists one product, with no price diferential - cars have become a necessity in our lives and as such a commodity.

[Leo Capaldi]

Hi, I live in Scotland and the general attitude here is that a car is simply a convenience and part of a lifestyle that requires independant transport. "Joe Public" simply wants a means of transport and preferably with lots of gadgets, but not neccessarily a "drivers car". All current cars are essentially good cars and "enthusiastic" driving has become a thing that only dinosaurs do. As a result more buyers move toward brand names that are in vogue no matter why, just like buying a Sony television was essential to be level with one's neighbours. As we know, the Lancia image is for understated people and therefore does not attract the sort of buyers who aspire to having a "Jag" or a "Beemer" etc. People today want more trendy and flashy cars that match their relatively extravagant lifstyle. The days when people bought a car because it drove well are gone. Have you noticed the huge numbers of Mercedes that are on the roads today? That sums it all up - people have more disposable income and want to "move up" in the consumer world (and be seen to "move up"). If the Lancia brand is to survive it will have be in a niche market with relatively small sales - unless the marketing people change the image to a more "Loud" one.

[Randy Adams]

My fantasy is that Lancia would re-tool itself for smaller production. The company would emphasize specialist low volume cars like the Hyena (built in a quantity of, say, 10,000 units or so) with total production of all models not exceeding maybe 50,000 units a year if even that much. The company would be permitted to do its own mechanical design again. The Lancia would once again become the esoteric choice for the true car connoisseur. This is exactly what Lancia was in the 1950s and 1960s. Everyone else could drive their lowest common denominator appliances.

[Leo Capaldi]

Yes I think that is the way ahead for the Lancia brand - small production, niche market. With current production technology it is fairly easy for a "different car" to be built on thsame production line as is being used for mainstream cars (obviously sharing common components, and not just one offs). These days car factories in Italy are not identified with any particular brand (except Ferrari/Maserati) so that they can produce various marques under one roof. The Lancia brand will still appeal to a certain type of people and generally they are people who are prepapred to pay a bit more for exclusivity, whereas the "man in sthe street" wants the same as his peers so that he is seen to be trendy or "acheiving" along with the rest of the pack.

Viva Lancia!

[Heini]

Hello
Small production, this would be nice. But who will pay the higher price
for a small production and a brand like Lancia, because its bad image!?
Only few of "Lancia-Hardliners" isn't enough ...............................
Greetings
Heini

[Julian H. Tice]

In business anything is possible.

Bad image can be changed. Look at Skoda, or even Maserati. Poor profitability - take the recovery of Nissan which is now a textbook example.

Did the Fiat group loose its way in the past few years? Probably. That is not to say that the product wasn´t good but that cost control, capacity planning etc. weren´t up to scratch, customer service was in need of some TLC and attention to marketing/product placement and timely mid-life cosmetic updates was lacking.

What is the solution? I am not a marketing guru but I can see that the group needs to communicate the "new impetus" being developed. A good move has been made by proposing five year warranties and the promise of a new product line-up. This is just good sense given market conditions.

Lancia products should be "special", for the discerning consumer. That means something that is not off the peg (get your supply-chain-management right). In MHO Lancia should leverage the use of carrozzeria such as Maggiora (who built my Kappa coupé and are in on the Granturismo Stilnovo project). If I am going to splash some extra cash on a premium product I want to feel that it is a state of the art product built by specialists. I believe that these people are eminently capable of producing a quality product in moderate numbers and down to a price. Sorry, but price is always going to be a factor.


J.

[Randy Adams]

Actually, Lancia in the 1950s and 1960s (and earlier as well) did NOT have a bad reputation. The cars were known for brilliant mechanical design and durability on a level not usually encountered in Italian cars. They were always expensive. The Flaminia models cost exactly one-half the cost of a Ferrari, so take the current Ferrari price tag and cut it in half and you have Lancia's proper flagship price range. The Fulvia coupe cost as much as a full size Buick sedan in the U.S., so it was not a cheap car either. And the Flavia occupied the giant middle ground between the other two. ALL of the model ranges offered models bodied by the great Italian carrozzeria. Great cars of the Lancia type cost money. Fiat drove Lancia down market; they gave Lancia one single underfunded opportunity to design its own car in its own fashion with the Gamma and then, never again. Not surprisingly, the Gamma coupe is the most beautiful car bearing the Lancia badge since the Fiat takeover. Fiat did not even have the good sense to give Lancia the 130 engine to use for a flagship model after Fiat themselves were unable to sell it.

I do not see any appeal to an Italian General Motors which is exactly what Fiat has become. Lancia and Alfa Romeo are just "brands." Before Fiat took them over, they were "breeds." Do people understand the difference? It is a profound one. Maserati's new cars are probably better than the Detomaso-era products but it is equally probable that this company's days as a breed are also numbered. The only company who seems to have prospered under Fiat is Ferrari. Perhaps it is too much to ask for anything more.

My vote is for breaking up the Fiat group.