As a former auto guy, I read with some interest and with more than a little bit of irony that the announcement that the now infamous Daimler-Chrysler merger back in 1998 has been undone. Back when it was announced, the world press heralded it as a harbinger of the future globalization of not only the auto industry but all of the world economy.I didn't see it that way back in 1998 and it looks like perhaps that opinion was correct.
The new Daimler-Chrysler (back in 1998) was to be a cost-efficient automobile behemoth with over 500,000 employees and annual revenue of $140 billion. The new company, at that time, would be the fifth largest automobile producer and the efficiency gained by the combination of these to entities was to be a competitive advantage that would "challenge GM, Ford and Toyota". The Chrysler Chairman at the time, Robert J. Eaton, said that that the World class products and brands (would) complement each other, and Daimler-Benz Chairman Juergen E. Schrempp, said that the two companies would be a "Perfect fit of two market leaders for further global growth"
So much for the predictions of two very over-paid people.
Today, if you read the fine print you'll find that the German executives of Daimler had to pay the American Cerberus Capital Management company over $1 billion to take the now-failing Chrysler Division off their hands.
They paid $38 BILLION for this company in 1998 which is less than ten years ago and now have to pay another BILLION to get rid of the thing.
That's about $40 billion in 10 years, $4 billion a year or about $11 million a day.
Pretty expensive mistake don't you think?
Now, what is the point? Why mention this in this Blog?
Simple: All that is said to be "new and improved" isn't. Just because people that run very large organizations say something is "good" doesn't mean it is.
I've found that truth in the statement that often the simple can confound the wise. The Bible says that God has chosen the foolish things of this world to shame the wise, the weak things to shame the strong (1 Corinthians 1:27-28).
Big isn't always, "better" and new isn't always "improved". The strength of Chrysler was their brand image and economies of scale. Automobile companies do well when they focus on the basics, build good cars and keep their costs down.
If you excuse the simple comparison, Churches and other ministries can sometimes get caught up in the "bigger is better" view of reality. While bigger can be better, it is also sometimes less personal and less effective. Smaller ministries are often much more focused on a specific purpose and much more effective in getting the job done.
Recently, I've met some people that are pretty single-focused. God has given them a vision of how they can be helpful in some very small way that makes a difference in His kingdom. These people may not be running large organizations or be people of note, unlikely to be included in biographies of "movers and shakers".
At the same time they are both individually and collectively making a difference in real lives and as a result, we are all better because of their work and ministry.
Just another example of the simple confounding the wise.
