Quote:
Originally Posted by pauldun170
Your argument is that dealers were not responsible for for the automakers condition. Are you concluding that in pursuit of reorganization and creating a model that would leave to increased market competitiveness, it is unreasonable for manufacturers to sever contracts and obligations to existing under-performing dealers and pursue a distribution model that fits existing market conditions?
Is it improper for the auto manufacturers to control their distribution using the strategy they desire?
US manufacturers have a legacy dealership network that does no longer fits their market share. More dealers do not equal more sales and when a manufacturer has a brand equity problem (in some cases aggravated by points in your distribution network) in addition to pricing issues due to internetwork competition there is a valid case to redecorate your map.
|
They can do whatever they want. They aren't even a public company anymore so they don't have any shareholders to answer to. Either way their dealer network structure may have been loosing them money but it couldn't have been more than a drop in the bucket. Farting around with their dealer network while essentially transferring ownership to the American and Canadian governments and most ridiculously to the UAW is like re-carpeting a house that fell in a sinkhole.
