Chrysler and Fiat - Italian-American Flavor?

yipyipyipee

OK, the German-American relationship (i.e. DaimlerChrysler) isn't going well and thoughts of filing divorce papers is surfacing (or already in the process).

The rumor-mill is running amok of a possible French/Japanese/American (i.e. Renault/Nissan/Chrysler) menage-a-trois or even a Chinese-American (i.e. Chery Motors/Chrysler) partnership.

Bah, I say it's all a soap-opera re-run. Therefore, I say it's time for some Italian passion and a tie-up with the Fiat Group shouldn't be ignored. And please, don't bring up the old "Fix It Again Tony" jokes about the reputation of Fiat cars of yore.

Interestingly, this isn't the first time a Chrysler-Fiat partnership has been considered. Back in 1988, Lee Iaccoca and then Fiat Chairman Giovanni Agnelli, were longtime friends (http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m3165/is_n11_v24/ai_6829756).

So, why look at this relationship again? Here are my observations:

- Style/Design -
Personally, I find Chrysler vehicle styling and design to be between average and boring. Not a good position to be in when even the likes of Honda of America are finally spicing things up (e.g. new Civic and forthcoming new Accord).

If you take a look at the new Fiat Bravo and the recently introduced new Grand Punto, styled by Giugiaro, these are cars that have a 21st century look, enhancing "drivability" which should appeal to all demographics and most importantly, women who are image conscious and have a disposable income.

Oh, and let's not forget that Alfa Romeo is part of the Fiat Auto Group. Therefore, Chrysler-Fiat could offer vehicles to BMW/Audi/Mercedes-Benz buyers too.

Go to http://www.fiat.com to see Bravo and Grand Punto.

- Technology -
Fiat's core competency is making small, stylish and economical cars. Something that America is, finally, beginning to accept again. And more than likely will continue for the foreseeable future.

The Fiat engine line-up includes everything from economical to high-performance. Indeed, Fiat's MultiJet (sulfur-free) diesel engines are on par with the Germans and most are very fuel-efficient.

- Safety and Reliability -
The equivalent of NHTSA testing is Euro NCAP and Fiat's latest range of cars get the highest ratings possible.

As to reliability, well, it's certainly better than the "Fix It Again Tony" days, and the most recent cars have had good reliability ratings thus far. Still, this is where Chrysler, with it's ten year association with co-German engineering experience, can benefit the relationship.

- Positioning -
I think certain domestic models (e.g. SUVs, trucks, vans) should be emphasized with the Dodge and Jeep brands and Chrysler take on compact and sub-compact Fiat based cars like the Grand Punto and the Bravo.

And yes, bring back Alfa Romeo with readily available Chrysler/Dodge dealerships.

So, a Chrysler "Soprano" anyone?

Comments welcome of course.

YipYipYipee

hpmctorque

I imagine Fiat is running some numbers on such a combination. Among other considerations, Fiat will need a dance partner sooner or later, and Chrysler could provide an entree into the North American market. On the other hand, the negatives of such a combination, for Chrysler and Fiat alike, are numerous.

yipyipyipee

Thanks for the reply, HPMCTORQUE.

Agreed. I've only done a "scribbles on a napkin" approach to this idea and admit there is still a great amount of due diligence required to see if this partnership is even possible.

From a technology perspective, I'm not sure if Fiat cars, like the Grand Punto or new Bravo, are engineered to be "global platform" vehicles. I certainly hope they can be.

If you've had the opportunity to look at the afore mentioned cars, and were in the market to buy a compact/sub-compact, would you consider looking at one? And if so, what would you compare it with?

YipYipYipee

jaserb

"And yes, bring back Alfa Romeo with readily available Chrysler/Dodge dealerships." Um... no.

Alfa entered into a distribution agreement with Chrysler back in the '80s called ARDONA that did exactly that - sold Alfas in Chrysler dealerships. Given that you can no longer buy an Alfa in the US I'll let you imagine how well it worked.

-Jason

yipyipyipee

In hindsight, I think you're right, Jason. It hadn't and wouldn't work.

In any case, there are established plans to sell Alfa Romeo through the existing Masarati dealerships. If it ever happens.

YipYipYipee

hpmctorque

"If you've had the opportunity to look at the afore mentioned cars, and were in the market to buy a compact/sub-compact, would you consider looking at one? And if so, what would you compare it with?"

Yes, I'd consider them, since I'm familiar with Fiats. They're fun to drive, and I think that now that they've got to compete with Toyota and others, their quality has improved significantly.

I'd compare them with VW golf/Rabbits and Jettas, Focuses, Astras, etc.

hpmctorque

A three way merger between Fiat, Peugeot, and Chrysler might make strategic sense in terms of scale, and reintroducing Fiat and Peugeot (which also owns Citroen) products in the North American market. Such a combination would be a huge challenge in terms of execution, however.

snakeweasel

And please, don't bring up the old "Fix It Again Tony" jokes about the reputation of Fiat cars of yore.

Rats there goes all my fun.

But in reality I think it could benefit Fiat as it would give them entry into the North American market again. But for Chrysler I think it would be a mistake to merge with a make that hasn't been in North America for decades. If Fiat had a good presence in NA then I would say it would work, but since they don't Chrysler would have to be crazy to even consider it.

yipyipyipee

"Yes, I'd consider them, since I'm familiar with Fiats. They're fun to drive, and I think that now that they've got to compete with Toyota and others, their quality has improved significantly."

I assume that by you saying you're familiar with Fiats, you've driven the more recent products in Europe or elsewhere? If so, which one(s)?

Personally, I drove a Grand Punto, although it was powered by the 1.2L engine. Great around town, but get it out on the highway and you really had to be careful about overtaking traffic.

"
I'd compare them with VW golf/Rabbits and Jettas, Focuses, Astras, etc."

Yes, I'd agree with you there. In terms of fit, finish and preceived quality, pretty much on par with what else is available in the class.

YipYipYipee

yipyipyipee

Yes, that would be a challenge to execute. And it would be great to introduce some of the cars in the Peugeot/Citroen stable to the U.S.

However, I'm concerned the French designed products would be culturally or even functionally challenging to the U.S. market.

YipYipYipee

yipyipyipee

Well, I wasn't strictly thinking of a merger. Rather a technology sharing and/or licensing scheme.

As I've mentioned before, Chrysler lacks access to small car technology, which it desperately needs to compete. What Mercedes-Benz has is inappropriate or too expensive to manufacture.

I think Fiat's absence from the American market is a good thing. Cars like the new Bravo and Grand Punto would be so distinctive and different, they'd make refreshingly decent alternatives to what's already available in America (think Mini, which really was a Rover product and the only thing kept by BMW). Just make sure they're badged Chrysler (or maybe Dodge).

Fiat understands licensing and has a tradition in this business. So, assuming the cars can be easily modified to comply with U.S. safety and emissions, it's a matter of re-tooling a plant to manufacture them. Far cheaper (especially with Federal and State incentives in place) and a faster turn-around than building a "new" car.

YipYipYipee

hpmctorque

"...If so, which one(s)?"

The most recent one was a '99 Punto 1.4. Before that a 1.3 turbo-diesel, can't remember the model name, but it was one size smaller that the Punto. That was particularly impressive, as it had suprising power and handled well. It was a blast to drive in the mountains.

yipyipyipee

"The most recent one was a '99 Punto 1.4. Before that a 1.3 turbo-diesel, can't remember the model name, but it was one size smaller that the Punto. That was particularly impressive, as it had suprising power and handled well. It was a blast to drive in the mountains."

Smaller than a Punto with a 1.3 turbo-diesel... Hmm, are you sure it was a Fiat? I wonder if you're referring to a VW Lupo. If so, I had one of those. Great car, lurched a bit on round-abouts as it had the significantly heavier 1.4L "Pumpe Düse" turbo-diesel (with intercooler no less!). Still, it was a hoot to drive on the Welsh roads... Unfortunately, it got totaled so I replaced it with a used Audi A2 with all the toys. Anyway, I digress.

Reuters recently reported Fiat's CEO has no interest in buying Chrysler, but I still think there is an opportunity for Chrysler to license vehicles for production or importation into the U.S. market.

YipYipYipee

boaz47

Fiat was bleeding red ink so bad it was hard to think of them buying anyone. It wasn't all that long ago the economists were warning everyone that before GM divested themselves of part of Fiat that they might have to honor the "put" order in the contract and that would have cost GM a boatload. Has Fiat by some miracle found a way to stop the bleeding?

yipyipyipee

"Has Fiat by some miracle found a way to stop the bleeding?"

Comparatively speaking, yes.

The soon to be released new Bravo went from design to manufacturing in 18 months. And it's a car they hope will get them clearly in the black (along with the Grande Punto and soon to be released Fiat Nuova 500).

Fiat also has finished arrangements with its union and the Italian government, the early retirement of 2,000 Fiat workers.

So far so good.

YipYipYipee

andys120

(think Mini, which really was a Rover product and the only thing kept by BMW).

Rover did inherit the original Mini from the defunct Bitish Leyland but the modern day Mini was designed entirely by engineers inthe employ of BMW AG, it is built at Oxford rather than the old Rover plant at Longbridge.

To get back on topic, I think the Fiat Bravo would sell well in the US market now that small car sales are rising. IMHO this makes a Sentra or a Corolla look downright frumpy.>

boaz47

Well I will admit in most cases I like the look and style of Italian cars. But I don't think you can go from near death to buying Chrysler in one felt swoop. Comparative or not it sounds like a lot of wishful thinking. The history of Fiat in the US has always been as an interesting second car but not something you can count on for day to day driving. I have to admit smaller cars are doing better than they have in years but I am not sure we are ready for a return of the Italians just yet. I agree they left of their own free will when they left the US market, unlike the French who were driven off of our shores much like hounds chasing a fox. I also agree they must have a ready made dealer network to even get e foothold. It just doesn't seem possible that they can go from pleading for their life to buying Chrysler in less than five years. I am not ready to start holding my breath just yet. Though I could see taking the plunge for a Alfa if they could pull it off.

yipyipyipee

"Rover did inherit the original Mini from the defunct Bitish Leyland but the modern day Mini was designed entirely by engineers in the employ of BMW AG, it is built at Oxford rather than the old Rover plant at Longbridge."

Thanks for volunteering the clarification.

And yes I agree the new Bravo, the Grande Punto and even the new 500 are great looking cars, perfect for the compact/sub-compact market. Indeed, I've been disappointed in what Chrysler has been putting out in the market these past few years. It's time for a change.

YipYipYipee

yipyipyipee

"It just doesn't seem possible that they can go from pleading for their life to buying Chrysler in less than five years. I am not ready to start holding my breath just yet. Though I could see taking the plunge for a Alfa if they could pull it off."

Well, for the record, Reuters reported yesterday the CEO of Fiat has "Zero" interest in purchasing Chrysler.

I agree that some of the Fiat products of the late 90's and early 00's had quality, reliability or design issues. Thankfully, Fiat not only restructured themselves financially, but product, manufacturing and design wise too. And you can see that in cars like the Panda, the Grande Punto and the new Bravo. All have the highest Euro NCAP safety ratings and so far, favorable initial customer satisfaction surveys.

I don't expect Fiat to take over Chrysler. Rather, I expect the new owners to possibly license some of Fiat's car models and manufacturer them domestically. Perhaps on a kind of lend-lease or even profit-share program.

An example scenario could be the "new" Chrysler will embark on an immediate crash program to get the Fiat models emission and safety compliant. Then start building and importing these U.S. bound models from existing Fiat factories (e.g. South America). Then at some phase, re-tool an existing U.S. Chrysler factory to build them domestically.

I think the trend is favorable for smaller, European styled cars to make it here in America. Indeed, Saturn seems to have done well by introducing the Aura (aka Opel Vectra), recently voted "North American Car of the Year".

Speaking of Saturn, I hope they bring in the new Opel Corsa. That's a great looking car.

YipYipYipee

yipyipyipee

Latest news is VW and Renault-Nissan are going to take a pass on Chrysler. Indeed, ultimately I don't expect GM to go for the company either.

So, that leaves the Chinese and the equity firms. Therefore, my theory on getting some hot new Fiats is still a possibility.

YipYipYipee

brooklynmike

By Fiat marketing its cars through another name brand, they can sell cars in the US without having to set up another dealer network like what they are doing with the FIAT Seidici/Suzuki SX4.

Chrysler would be my first choice for a marketing partner. The Alfa Romeo nameplate would also be a welcome addition. The automotive press, while often harsh, will acknowledge a fine automobile.

I do have a question. Can they make the FIAT product line comply to Emission/Safety standards?

nippononly

that GM PAID OUT $2 billion such a short time NOT to be lumbered with Fiat. What looks like it is on an upswing on the surface may be quite the opposite behind the scenes.

I fully expect my speculation of six months ago to come true before the end of the decade: that Chrysler will be in Chinese hands (owned by Chery or perhaps SAIC). Clearly Cerberus is panicking even as it is trying so desperately to demonstrate that it is not. Perhaps that sale will come sooner than even I imagined.

boaz47

I like Chrysler and would hate to see them go. I was not impressed with their relationship with Daimler and would be less impressed with them being acquired by an Asian company.

I was around when Studebaker went under and it was hardly a blip on the car buying screen. When American Motors shut down I don't know many even noticed. I had never even driven a AMC vehicle. But the one upside I could see in Chrysler being bought by an Asian company is we might get a delivery system for some cars more people could afford. The economy is taking a big hit and new cars sales are taking a big hit with it. Maybe the Chinese would infuse some affordable vehicles into the system so people wouldn't have to resort to older used cars? At least it would be the parts and service disaster the French had when they were here.

hpmctorque

This discussion has been dead for over a year because a Chrysler-Fiat alliance seemed such a long shot, and, to many, the business case didn't seem sound. Well, the improbable has happened. Hopefully, Fiat has learned from Daimler-Benz's mistakes.

stever

Good job sniffing this one out.

The alliance wasn't such a long shot in the end game after all, eh?

hpmctorque

Yeah, and the interesting this is that this deal, if it goes through - it's not a don deal yet - makes strategic sense. Chrysler gets the small cars it desperately needs for the North American market, plus greatly increased distribution in Europe for its Jeeps and minivans, and perhaps its large RWD sedans, if they're dieselized. Fiat gains distribution into the North American market.

Another strong point, from a strategic standpoint, is that there is minimal, if any, product overlap.

Additional factors include the fact that Chrysler dealers will, hopefully, get new models that people will want to buy. As a corollary, North American consumers will get more choices, and the increased competition from a viable Chrysler will help values. Additionally, Fiat has leading edge technology, which could be very useful to Chrysler.

Now, it goes without saying that an alliance that makes strategic sense doesn't guarantee success, because Murphy's law hasn't been repealed. However, is the outlook for Chrysler more hopeful than it just a few days ago? You betcha!

stever

Maybe the upshot will be that Chrysler will export US made Jeeps to India using Fiat's connections there. Or maybe they'll just wind up shipping the tooling there.

dtownfb

Overall, a good move. I guess the big question: is this deal too late to save Chrysler? it takes a while to integrate car lines. Can they start selling Fiats right away?

hpmctorque

The U.S. government should grant Fiat a temporary waiver on safety and emissions regulations to permit Chrysler to begin selling Fiats or Fiats rebadged as Dodges and/or Chryslers without delay. These are extraordinary times, and extraordinary times justify extraordinary measures. After all, Europe isn't exactly the third world, so just how unsafe and polluting can cars that qualify there be?

In order to be fair, other automakers should be allowed the same exemptions. Ford would already be selling Fiestas here if the regulations were relaxed. And just imagine how many excellent diesel cars would be available. Again, this would be a temporary measure, to accommodate the current crisis.

nippononly

It's the U.S. crash requirements that make it hard for automakers to import their European models here, not the emissions regulations. The emissions regs only impact the diesels.

Do you really want less safe cars to be sold here, in a time of decreasing driver involvement, more and more powerful cars, and a proliferation of higher-centered SUVs and crossovers? The safety requirements for cars sold in the U.S. are already fairly minimal.

It would be nice to see cars with a European flavor compete in the U.S. with VW, the only other low-priced European brand here. But Fiats? They might end up making us feel we had it pretty darn good with VW.

hpmctorque

How confident are you that your knowledge or perception of Fiat's reliability are up-to-date, and not based on cars from the imported Fiats of the '60s, '70s and '80s?

nippononly

Not at ALL confident. ;-)

fezo

I'm kind of with nippon on this one. While I am sure that Fiat is quite a different company than the one that closed up shop in teh USA decades ago there is going to be a huge perception problem that will need to be addressed.

My biggest concern is whether they will get enough time to prove themselves. If they and Cerberus are willing to put their money up on this one I'm certainly willing to see what they've got.

I look at it as Renault likely has much better vehicles than when they left the USA. I'm sure that it's the prior perception that keeps them out now.

hpmctorque

"Not at ALL confident" that your knowledge and perception of the current state of Fiat's reliability are accurate, or that the reliability of today's Fiats would prevent them from succeeding in the U.S.?

smithed

"It's the U.S. crash requirements that make it hard for automakers to import their European models here, not the emissions regulations. The emissions regs only impact the diesels."

Don't you think they will meet the requirements? Two reasons: regulation required and unsafe won't sell. People pay attention to the number of stars.

dtownfb

Somebody needs to explain to me what this whole deal is about? Based on this article, Fiat is in more debt than reported.

Fiat debt levels soar, 2009 profits seen lower
Speculation emerges on combination with PSA Peugeot Citroen

January 22, 2009 - 9:00 am ET
UPDATED: 1/22/09 1:14 p.m. EST

MILAN (Reuters) -- Italy's Fiat SpA, poised to take a 35 percent stake in Chrysler LLC, slashed its profit outlook for 2009 by about a third and revealed a debt pile three times its own forecasts, sending shares in Europe's sixth-biggest automaker nearly 12 percent lower.
Subscribe to Automotive News

Industrial debt, which excludes debt from financial services, soared to 5.9 billion euros ($7.66 billion) last year, shocking investors and sending shares in the maker of cars, trucks and tractors down 11.35 percent to 3.9450 euros in afternoon trading, their lowest level in around 15 years.

"They are burning cash ... It's awful," said one Milan broker.

Fiat also reported a 30 percent drop in fourth quarter trading profit to 663 million euros ($858 million), which did beat analysts' average expectations.

The company said trading profit for this year would be in excess of 1 billion euros ($1.29 billion) compared to a previous forecast for between 1.5 and 2.3 billion euros.

Merger speculation reported

The debt news appeared to give weight to a La Repubblica newspaper report of a possible capital increase that could be used for a potential merger with France's PSA Peugeot Citroen. But Fiat called the report groundless and made no reference to a possible merger with PSA.

The newspaper said Fiat's founding family is weighing a capital increase of about 2 billion euros ($2.58 billion).

The capital increase by the Agnelli family's Exor holding company would aim at keeping a significant stake in a merged company, La Repubblica said on Thursday without citing sources. The Agnellis own about 30 percent of Fiat through Exor.

A PSA spokesman had no comment apart from saying the French car maker's priority was to come out of the crisis gripping the car industry.

Fiat and PSA are Europe's leaders in small cars which have low carbon dioxide emissions and are suited for city traffic.

Fiat and PSA have been working together since 1978 and have two joint ventures, making vans and multi-purpose vehicles in the north of France and central Italy. They also teamed up with Tofas for a car factory in Bursa, Turkey.

A source told Reuters Fiat was working with banks on a credit line of up to 5 billion euros ($6.46 billion).

The global economic crisis has led to a decimation of car sales worldwide as consumers postpone big purchases amid fears for their jobs as well as problems getting credit.

Fiat and other automakers have been scrambling to cut the cost of mounting inventories of unsold vehicles by suspending production and laying off workers. They have also called on their governments for help.

Fiat's no-cash bid for Chrylser -- in exchange for Fiat giving Chrysler access to its small car technology and platforms -- is contingent on Chrysler winning another $3 billion in U.S. government funding. Chrysler already has received $4 billion in such funding.

Ratings review

After Fiat issued the report, ratings agency Standard & Poor's said it would consider lowering the automaker's debt ratings.

The move "reflects our view that the tough scenario for the auto and truck sector in 2009 will pressure the ratings on Fiat given the higher-than-expected, sharp increase in the group's financial debt, the ensuing reduction of the group's liquidity position, and the harsh financial market conditions" that Fiat faces, credit analyst Barbara Castellano said in a written report.

Standard & Poor's said it would further review the proposed deal with Chrysler.

"We do not see any immediate benefit for Fiat from the announced deal with Chrysler," the report said. "But in the future the 35 percent stake that the group would own if the transaction closes could be advantageous for the group.

"However, although there will be no cash outflow over the next few months, Fiat may engage in technical aspects of the transfer of knowledge and technologies to Chrysler, requiring some effort on the part of the group."

Inventories pile up

In reference to its soaring debt, Fiat said capital spending had risen 36 percent during 2008 while working capital climbed to 3.6 billion euro as unsold vehicles piled up.

Fiat will also have to provide financing to its agricultural equipment unit, CNH Global NV, because the U.S.-based operation was not able to get funding from the asset-backed securities market. This market has virtually shut down as a result of the crisis, a source close to the group told Reuters.

Fiat, whose CEO Sergio Marchionne had prided himself on meeting his targets, said in a statement it had suspended its share repurchase program. It will not pay a dividend except for savings shares in a move to preserve cash.

At the end of 2008, it had 3.9 billion euros ($5.04 billion) of liquidity.

For 2009, Fiat expected net industrial cash in excess of 1 billion euros with net industrial debt falling below the 5 billion euro mark.

Since Fiat was the first European car maker to report results, its numbers gave the market an idea of what to expect from its peers.

"We are going to be shocked by the state of balance sheets by the end of 2009," Bernstein analyst Max Warburton said.

Shares in France's PSA were down 3.17 percent and those of Renault off 6.25 percent.

kernick

http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/2009-01-22-chrysler-fiat-merger-deal_N.htm

I'll also petition my congressmen to get Chrysler?cerberus to return the loan money.

farout

I have been driving Chrysler products for 20 years now. I fail to understand how Fiat, that is deeply in deb,t could be a good combination working with Chrysler. Chrysler, thanks to Daimler, moved to producing low quality materials inside the Chrysler vehicles. Hard plastic cheap looking, and poor fit and finish was the order of the day. Fiat is not noted for quality and well built vehicles from when they last were imported to the USA.

Is Chrysler, owned by Cerberus, so desperate they would jump at any old company they could find? Why not look at the old Yugo company?

Cerberus can unite with BMW, but until the quality of the cabin matches the quality of the engines and transmissions Chrysler will drop more in sales to the point no one would even consider uniting with them. Fiat is not a good match as I see it.

What has happened that Fiat looks like a good company to GIVE 35% of Chrysler to, for not one dime? This seems unbelievable!

farout

dtownfb

"Is Chrysler, owned by Cerberus, so desperate they would jump at any old company they could find? Why not look at the old Yugo company? "

Yes, Cerebus is that desparate. Chrysler has absolutely no chance of survival without the help of another company. Fiat is probably the only company that is will to partner with Chrysler. Fiat is looking to get back into the US market, Chrysler needs small cars. Up until this morning, it looked like a good deal.

kernick

Up until this morning, it looked like a good deal.

Well yeah maybe for those who were going to benefit, keeping their jobs or stock based on the backing of everyone else's money.

The fact is there are too many manufacturers with too many models producing too many vehicles around the world. This was true before the economic crisis, and is more so now. Some manufacturers, plants and workers need to be removed from the system.

Think about it - how many different vehicle models are actually needed in the world -100? Why GM alone makes them many with their 12 world-wide divisions. Do you know what that means? A lot of effort put into engineering, designing, and building all these variations.

So I say let the weak manufacturers - companies with bad product or mismanagement - go out of business.

stever

"Still digesting the possibilities and likelihood of the proposed alliance between Chrysler LLC and Fiat S.p.A? Add French automaker PSA Peugeot-Citroen to the mix.

Now, it appears the two companies could, for no investment, place Fiat, Renault and Peugeot cars in Chrysler showrooms and potentially shoulder out the vehicles of the fading Chrysler, nurturing only the still-attractive Jeep brand and possibly Chrysler's pickups."

Chrysler-Fiat Alliance Gets More Interesting With PSA Presence (AutoObserver)

Threesome: Fiat Looks To Link With Peugeot as Well as Chrysler, Reports Say (AutoObserver)

hpmctorque

Indeed, it does get more interesting, and maybe more viable too, while at the same time more complex. Whew!

iluvmysephia1

needing a more favorable direction, something could very well combine here from the three of them. Interesting proposition going here, can't wait to see the outcome.

farout

Financing for customers remains a key problem. No matter who unites, or joins in with Chrysler, it makes no difference if the joint vehicles were the very best in the world without financing Chrysler is still dead in the water.

Banks have been given money to help main street, but there is no evidence of any trickle down of funds. The taxpayer has once again been screwed by the rich CEO"s who still got their bonus, and give it to others as well.

We live in a time when greed runs the wealthy to become more greedy. There is a time coming when the workers of America will say enough! Think about it 500,000 lost jobs in December! In California those without jobs are now at 10%. Jobs once thought that no one would want, now have lines of good people willing to take poor paying jobs.

Will Chrysler make it? I once thought so, now I am not so positive, maybe not as we know Chrysler now.

farout

nippononly

From the article you linked...

Corker, a member of the Senate Banking Committee, lashed Detroit auto executives with tough questions about their survival plans when they asked for financial help late last year.

Still, he wonders about the alternative: "I think there's no chance that Chrysler can pay the money back to taxpayers as a stand-alone. None. I want taxpayers to get their money back. The stronger the company is, the better the chance."

If there's no chance they could pay back the loan, then why the H-E-double-toothpicks did you loan it to them in the first place? Chrysler should NEVER have received a penny.

This whole Fiat-Chrysler thing is just another piece of craziness hatched by executives anxious to keep the ship afloat five minutes longer so they can get their million dollar parachutes in order in time. :sick:

farout

nippononly: The US auto makers loan came with more restrictions than any other loan made to anyone else. This is not the first time to government has loaned out money. In 1978 Chrysler got a loan and paid it back early. Many were saying Chrysler would not be able to pay it back. But they did and the US got good interest too.

If you are really worries then consider Bank of America or AIG. These loans are huge compared to GM & Chrysler loans. AIG paid out bonuses, and has very lavish trips tp a California resort, Bof A boss re modled his office for more than $ 1,000,000. The new carpet cost $ 87,000. a couch was more than $ 160,000. and B of A paid out bonuses as well. Freddy and Fanny have misused the loans as well. NOT ONE DIME has yet to help anyone in foreclosure!

Crocker who is a southern Senator wants to protect his states assembly of foriegn autos. I personally think helping those who make parts in America, and and work putting together American vehicle deserve more than Senator Crockers workers. But, the point is all Americian workers need a even playing field. The Asianvehicle makers are substasized by their governments, and inturm we have to pay a import fee to send out vehicles to these asian countries, That is not a equal playing field.

This getting loans to spend the US out of a financial crisis is not likely to work. We are passing a debt that future generations will never be able to pay. China is and will demand payment, and what then? Maybe China will take California to cancel the debt?.

When our President says we are in desperate times I don't think we have any idea how bad it is. There is no way to get back to even close to where we were even in 6 years. Friend we are in a depression, when next december we are told we have lost 6,000,000 jobs in 2009 then it might hit home. In December 2008 500,000 lost their jobs.

To change to course to turn arround a small boat it might take 60 feet, an Aircraft carrier takes several miles. The US is much bigger than an Aircraft carrier. We have yet to choose which direction to turn arround, left or right. We have yet to see the new Captian get behind the helm. Look out!! Ice a head!!!

farout

farout

nippononly: The US auto makers loan came with more restrictions than any other loan made to anyone else. This is not the first time to government has loaned out money. In 1978 Chrysler got a loan and paid it back early. Many were saying Chrysler would not be able to pay it back. But they did and the US got good interest too.

If you are really worries then consider Bank of America or AIG. These loans are huge compared to GM & Chrysler loans. AIG paid out bonuses, and has very lavish trips tp a California resort, Bof A boss re modled his office for more than $ 1,000,000. The new carpet cost $ 87,000. a couch was more than $ 160,000. and B of A paid out bonuses as well. Freddy and Fanny have misused the loans as well. NOT ONE DIME has yet to help anyone in foreclosure!

Crocker who is a southern Senator wants to protect his states assembly of foriegn autos. I personally think helping those who make parts in America, and and work putting together American vehicle deserve more than Senator Crockers workers. But, the point is all Americian workers need a even playing field. The Asianvehicle makers are substasized by their governments, and inturm we have to pay a import fee to send out vehicles to these asian countries, That is not a equal playing field.

This getting loans to spend the US out of a financial crisis is not likely to work. We are passing a debt that future generations will never be able to pay. China is and will demand payment, and what then? Maybe China will take California to cancel the debt?.

When our President says we are in desperate times I don't think we have any idea how bad it is. There is no way to get back to even close to where we were even in 6 years. Friend we are in a depression, when next december we are told we have lost 6,000,000 jobs in 2009 then it might hit home. In December 2008 500,000 lost their jobs.

To change to course to turn arround a small boat it might take 60 feet, an Aircraft carrier takes several miles. The US is much bigger than an Aircraft carrier. We have yet to choose which direction to turn arround, left or right. We have yet to see the new Captian get behind the helm. Look out!! Ice a head!!!

farout

stever

an Aircraft carrier takes several miles

A carrier can just about turn on a dime with enough tugs.

Send some money (tugs) to Chrysler (and have Italy do the same for Fiat) and maybe you can turn the ship around and bail it out at the same time?

nippononly

I'm not accusing Chrysler of misusing the money, I am saying it is a company with no future, and is therefore WORTHLESS collateral for a loan. Bank of America and AIG are not.

If we could snap our fingers and Fiat platforms could be underneath Chryslers tomorrow, and Fiats in Chrysler showrooms, it would be worth seeing if this thing had a shot. But neither company has the five years of waiting time that is needed before this deal bears any fruit.

kernick

Two points

1) Before considering loans to Chrysler, I would ask for proof that the parent Cerberus, is broke. I would first want to know if any money could be diverted from the companies under Cerberus. Also maybe Cerberus could sell 1 or 2 of its other businesses, and take whatever it gets to put towards Chrysler. Sort of like selling you boat and camper to keep paying for your house.

2) There are simply too many auto manufacturers with too many plants in the world. Why shouldn't the natural process of letting the weakest fail be allowed? To me subsidizing unneeded or inefficient companies only makes the economy worse, by not allowing resources to go to the healthy companies.

iluvmysephia1

the Fiat and PSA Companies want the inroads in to showrooms, plants and lot space in America. A shot to sell their fuel-efficient, small, foreign-built cars in the U.S. Why not, Toyota, Nissan, Mitsubishi, Mazda, etc. are doing it!

Besides, some of their engineers might actually think their cars are better than the Japanese cars. Or some of the Japanese cars, ones that, before this big one hit, actually appealed to and were bought by Americans.

They see the dice rolling, stopping and showing the right numbers facing up. What do they have to lose, eh?