Is Daimler on a rocky course?
| Are we at least on the right track now? |
Is that really the case, or are we just imagining it? Did this problem arise only recently, or is there historical evidence of it? Without further questioning, let's try to prove that
we can answer the second question with a 'yes' in good conscience.
Just take a look at the founder, after whom the company is still named today. Gottfried Daimler held a management position at Deutz in Cologne, in other words, practically right where it all happened, when the
four-stroke engine was invented there.
Unfortunately, however, he denied the inventor, the businessman Nikolaus Otto, almost any technical expertise. Consequently, he initially rejected the four-stroke engine. Later, however, he left Deutz with ample funds and
contractually agreed not to work on engines for a certain period.
That was exactly what he did afterward in the small garden shed at his villa in Stuttgart, together with his right-hand man, Wilhelm Maybach. And what were the two of them researching? You won't believe it, on the
four-stroke engine. We were there, today, of course, not back then, and convinced ourselves.
ChatGPT tells you that the 'grandfather clock engine' is considered the 'first practical gasoline engine for vehicles'. And what did the two of them use the motor for? For the 'Reitwagen' motorcycle, the motor carriage, and the
steel-wheeled vehicle, that was all.
And who was the first to get the engine on the road? Peugeot. Although the company already existed, it experienced a tremendous boost thanks to the engine developed by Daimler and Maybach. In this way, one created a
competitor that later posed enormous competition, for example, in the diesel engine sector.
And this was by no means the only time. This led to the creation of the brand of the same name, one of the first of its kind in Great Britain, as well as a collaboration with William Steinway in the U.S., which lasted only eight
years, and, last but not least, with Austro Daimler in Austria.
They had completely missed the early days of mobility driven by internal combustion engines; instead, they had distributed licenses, albeit with only limited validity. Around 1910, Consul Emil Jellinek rescued the talented
Wilhelm Maybach from the brink of obscurity and, through a string of racing successes, ensured a rapid increase in sales.
But that lasted only until 1907. So, after annoying Maybach for long enough, he ends up moving to his son's company. That company then positions itself as a luxury brand under the Mercedes umbrella for quite some time,
a classic case of clumsiness.
Starting around 1928, BMW's passenger car sales were supported; the brand was given space in the company's own showrooms, and for a time, the company even built car bodies for BMW until the brand had grown large
enough. Only then did they realize that it had become a genuine competitor.
In 1928, Ferdinand Porsche was angered to such an extent that he ultimately struck out on his own and helped Auto Union achieve numerous racing victories against his former company. That's what
you call knocking over with your butt what you built with your hands.
There is one action, however, for which one cannot be blamed: building the 30 Beetle prototypes and thereby essentially founding VW. Hitler's order was clearly unmistakable. However, that almost subservient
endorsement of the Nazis would be worth a discussion of its own.
But this is all about trials and tribulations. For example, after the war, when there were plans to turn BMW into an assembly plant for Mercedes, but unfortunately they went about it a little too arrogantly. No one could have
imagined that the brand would rise from the ashes like a phoenix.
A huge mistake regarding 'Auto Union'. They did acquire it, that part is correct. One fitted it with a four-stroke engine, that's correct, too. They lost interest and sold to VW, wrong. At the same time, they also lost a talented
engineer, Ludwig Kraus.
So, have we got it now? No, because Mercedes seems to have been the company that invested the most in the further development of the Wankel engine, only to ultimately put an end to it. Furthermore, it is worth
cautiously recalling the moose test, which, by the way, applies to both the A-Class and the Smart.
In the latter case, one might have been warned when Ferdinand Piëch effectively kicked Nicolas G. Hayek out and Daimler generously took him on in a joint subsidiary. It was never worth it
and that was to be expected.
In general, collaboration with other companies. The fact that a brand as prestigious as Mercedes needed a tuning firm like Cosworth to build a successful small production car, the 190 E 2.3-16, is really a sign of
weakness, isn't it?
This leads to a certain inability to manufacture what was once one's own invention, a perfectly functional engine, in the necessary quantities at an affordable price. Apparently so difficult that one was constantly looking for
ways to obtain them from outside sources.
We're talking about the four-cylinder inline engine, which, given its simplicity, was apparently hard for Mercedes to accept. In the first A-Class, it was modified, not to say complicated, so that sin the event of a crash, it would
slide under the car.
The second series then engines from Renault. This makes sense for small-scale production series, where in-house production isn't cost-effective. But they do occur in the A-Class and later the B-Class, right? Further
collaboration ensues. But that, too, does not last long.
The Smart brand is now based in China. Let's see how long they can hold out with Geely. Is there even a 1.5-liter mild-hybrid internal combustion engine coming from China these days? Yes, that is
actually planned for the CLA, GLB, and GLA models with the M252.
Does that mean the negotiations with BMW regarding the supply of engines are now obsolete? A collaboration like this had been considered before, but it failed. If something like this were done on a larger scale at
factories in the U.S., for example, in response to the tariffs, people would understand it right away.
At one point, Mercedes even hinted that it would only sell luxury vehicles, but fortunately, it has since backtracked on that statement. Is this a company with a reliable strategic direction, at least in the medium term? Probably
not.
In this case, we would just like to briefly point out the enormous losses caused by Mr. Reuter and Mr. Schrempp. And I'm not even referring to the company's involvement in Berlin, but rather to the insane investments
associated with 'DASA', 'Fokker', and 'Dornier'.
Also worth mentioning here are the loss-making investments in Chrysler, Hyundai, and even Mitsubishi. The latter then set in motion the beginning of the end for Schrempp at Mercedes. After that, one successfully bought
Tesla shares - and made a profit - but then sold it too soon.
| Maybe we should make a change again. |
| 
