Chrysler and Fiat - Italian-American Flavor?

kernick · January 2009

What do they have to lose, eh?

Nothing since they didn't put any money down! Why should we taxpayers who are now part owners of Chrysler and Chrysler financial agree to that? Why do you want the owners of Cerberus?

Look here's what should happen with Chrysler. Cerberus should announce it's for sale, and say all bids are to be in by Feb 28, and they will take the top bid. The Chrysler situation is as simple as that. It doesn't need U.S. taxpayer $ with a private owner, and an Italian partner.

Cerberus needs to pay back the U.S. Then if they don't want Chrysler they sell it, and accept the fact they made a big, lousy investment. I am not into playing Cerberus's game to somehow make others pay for for their bad investment.

If Fiat, or Porsche, or GE, or Catepillar want Chrysler then let them buy it and deal with it.

nippononly · January 2009

4 Chryslers, under Fiat's new plan:

Chrysler LLC and Fiat S.p.A. will bring seven new vehicles to North America under their alliance--four with Chrysler brands and three as Fiats or Alfa Romeos.

The vehicles will be built at Chrysler plants in North America and sold through select Chrysler, Dodge and Jeep dealerships, according to sources who have seen the product-sharing agreement.

The plan includes vehicles on four Fiat platforms--in the microcar, or A, through the mid-sized, or D, segments. The two companies have not decided on timing or volumes. Teams at both companies are hammering out details of a plan they hope to make final by April 30.

The two companies said last week that Fiat would take a 35 percent stake in Chrysler. Under terms of their tentative agreement, Chrysler will make the Fiat 500 at Chrysler's Toluca, Mexico, plant for sale in North America, according to sources familiar with the plans.

http://www.autoweek.com/article/20090126/FREE/901269997

stever · January 2009

Here's another version of the story:

Chrysler-Fiat's product-sharing scheme: 7 Fiats headed to the U.S.

And another (two years may be another lifetime for Chrysler though).

Chrysler-Badged Fiats Two Years Away

iluvmysephia1 · January 2009

that black Fiat 500 new-gen blows away anything Toyota has ever made in small rigs. No kidding. Toyota just does not know how to meld a nice or appealing, or cute, if you will, car body.

That's why I am following this proposed merger of Chryslerberus/Fiat, melding point, takeover, whatever it might be, with much interest. Gonna be really tough to wrest my '08 Mitsubishi Lancer GTS away from me, but, and it's a big butt, I would much rather observe on the streets rigs like the one above, than Hummers, Chrysler 300's, Chevy Malibu's, Ford F-150 pick-em-up trucks, etc.

Gag me with a roughly-hewn spoon!

nippononly · January 2009

that black Fiat 500 new-gen blows away anything Toyota has ever made in small rigs.

Don't it ever?! :-)

Although I am somewhat partial to the current Yaris hatch. NOT the sedan however.

I would love this merger idea if it would mean we would have the 500 and Abarth available to us by this time next year in Chrysler dealerships, with a 3-year warranty. Sadly, the chances of that are exactly nil.

iluvmysephia1 · January 2009

are saying that the financials of this deal are not gonna work out, for Fiat or Chryslerberus? Or Chrysler is going down the toilet so fast that Fiat execs will nix the idea on a cold, sober Monday morning very soon here?

nippononly · January 2009

Oh iluv, there are so many reasons this deal could end up in the toilet, it has no chance of succeeding.

My odds are on Congress calling in the Chrysler loan on April 1 due to Chrysler's failure to sufficiently reorganize in order to meet the conditions of the loan. At which point a prepackaged bankruptcy would HAVE to occur, after which Fiat would have no further interest, if it were even allowed by the government to continue the deal.

Now that particular route to the deal's demise DOES depend on the good sense of Congress, which of course is FAR from something you can count on. But it is only one potential path to demise of many....

iluvmysephia1 · January 2009

isn't Obama a pro-union, pro-UAW kind of a guy, who will tirelessly bend over backwards to save the maker of his beloved 300? Oh, say he will, nippon!

I can see Congress giving Chrysler(and sadly, GM too)every exception in the book under this Adminstration till the Fat Lady sings. I really can. They could just demand an easy to reach goal, one they can nearly count on Chrysler reaching, for a 2009 benchmark.

Sort of a Socialist's creed of acceptance. As long as the most Americans keep working. Oh, this is a huge order for the Guv-Mint to fill, indeed.

Mr_Shiftright · February 2009

If the government doesn't help you, why have a government? :P

I don't need a government to go tell me to go sink or swim. That's one message citizens do NOT like to hear.

American will endure great sacrifices if you give them a job to go to.

Autoworkers don't have to just build cars. They can re-cycle them, too, or rebuild them.

kernick · February 2009

If the government doesn't help you, why have a government?

Many people look at business and life like a game. As such government is the infrastructure and rules of the game. There will be people who do better and worse in the game; the government however should not be biased deciding which of the players get special treatment.

If something is "too big to fail" - like AIG, Citi, or the D3, then we need a new game-rule to limit their size before they must be split-up into separate organizations.

Right now the world does not need all these auto-makers, and the weak would fail, allowing the strong to survive if we let them. The alternative is for each to shrink greatly.

If Fiat or any other company wants to get involved with Cerberus or Chrysler, that should trigger immediate repayment of the Chrysler loan to the U.S.

If I knew Chrysler is going to entertain $0-Down-Deals, why heck many of us can make those.

yipyipyipee · June 2009

Hello all. I started this thread and I'm amazed how long it has lasted. Indeed, I wonder if the "new" Chrysler will last longer than how long this thread has been in existence. It is my hope they do.

In reflection, I believe if they had heeded my words, Chrysler would be in a better position product development wise, but even I didn't expect the downturn to be as severe financially.

I went on the Fiat website to refresh my thoughts and impressions of the current Fiat and Alfa Romeo line-up. And it is my fervent hope that Fiat will go through with resurrecting the Abarth name as a stand-alone brand for premium sports and GT configured Fiat cars like the Grande Punto, the 500 and Bravo. Of course, I expect to see the Abarth marketed and sold alongside their Chrysler branded, but lesser, siblings.

Anyone wanna make a bet?

stephen987 · June 2009

I think the Abarth legacy is probably no longer bankable in the US, as the heyday of the cars was 50 years ago. Of those who might buy, how many remember? Even the Alfa name is alien to a whole generation of American sports car enthusiasts.

Let me offer an alternative. I've suggested some variation on this scheme before, but here goes:

resurrect the Neon name as a separate brand, and fill it with "cheap and cheerful" Fiat-sourced vehicles like the 500, Qubo, Multipla, and Panda. The ad campaign could even start with "Hi again."
make Dodge a truck/van brand only
introduce Alfa Romeos as direct competitors for the sporty end of the VW line--if you try to pitch them directly against BMW they will not sell well
keep the Fiat brand name off of US-market cars
make Chrysler a brand for medium-to-large sedans only, and be prepared to sunset it
if and only if all this works, bring the Abarth name in as a higher-performance variant of the Alfa line

nippononly · June 2009

It will be really sweet if we get some U.S.-bound Abarths out of this, but will Fiat be able to shoulder the burden it is taking on here?

stephen987 · June 2009

A good question, particularly now that Fiat's bid for Opel appears to have failed. They could still try for Saab, but that would arguably give them exactly the wrong thing--too much exposure in the shrinking upper-middle market. Unlike many here, I think Fiat's small, quirky cars will do well in the US--think of them as alternatives to Scion, or to Kia's more interesting models (Soul, Rondo).

The wrong strategy would be to go directly into the mainstream--Toyota, Nissan, Honda, and Hyundai are too well entrenched there, and frankly I doubt Fiat can match their quality. Now might be the exact right time to sell "cheap and cheerful."

yipyipyipee · June 2009

An interesting proposition, Stephen, but I was only thinking the Abarth name would be new to the American market, the same way Scion, Lexus, Acura, Infiniti were introduced. It would also fit with Fiat's global strategy to use the Abarth name to sell premium small cars against the MINI, the BMW One series, VW GTI, etc.

Abarth has been traditionally associated with Fiat cars and not Alfa Romeo, and I don't think Fiat would be too keen confuse the rest of the global market on that point. It is the age of the Internet, you know.

stephen987 · June 2009

Good point, although there were also other brands used as a base for Abarth specials (Simca comes to mind). Perhaps Abarth could build only two-seaters and maybe a 500 variant.

My thinking was that "Neon" would work as an entry-level brand, and that Alfa would be the premium/performance brand. Creating a new brand might be more difficult than reviving an old one. Hard to say, though. The US market is really unpredictable right now.

Either way, I think we may be in for some interesting options by 2011. . .

yipyipyipee · June 2009

Oh, come on. Let's introduce Lancia into the mix and then we'll REALLY see what happens!

Indeed, it's a toss-up, although with the all the musical chairs, I think it would be a good time to introduce a "new" old brand.

stephen987 · June 2009

I miss the Lancias from the pre-Fiat days. Elegantly styled, mechanically innovative, and well built.

Unfortunately Lancia's been on life support for decades, ever since the days of the ill-conceived Prisma and Dedra.

yipyipyipee · June 2009

That's why I, jokingly, mentioned the Lancia brand. Oh, what I'd do to own a Stratos.

stephen987 · June 2009

I can understand that, but I'd settle for a nicely kept Fulvia, or maybe one of the big Flaminia coupes.

stever · June 2009

"An appeals court Friday upheld Chrysler LLC's plan to exit bankruptcy.

The new company will be owned jointly by the U.S. government, an autoworker's union retiree fund and the Italian Automaker Fiat.

The deal will go through on Monday afternoon unless the Supreme Court intervenes, Chrysler attorney Corinne Ball told CNN."

Chrysler-Fiat nears reality (CNN)

gagrice · June 2009

Ginzburg and the Supremes say NOT YET to Obama plan for Chrysler and Fiat.

The US Supreme Court on Monday put a temporary hold on the Chrysler plan to exit bankruptcy protection under an alliance with Italian automaker Fiat.

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg signed an order postponing the closing of the plan backed by the US and Canadian governments to allow Chrysler to emerge from bankruptcy as a new entity.

The order calls for a stay "pending further order by the undersigned or by the court."

The move will allow the justices to consider whether to allow a full hearing of the legal issues -- a delay which Chrysler and US officials say could cause the plan to collapse.

A group of Indiana pension funds opposed to Chrysler's sale to Fiat filed the emergency appeal with the Supreme Court to halt the sale.

Thankfully the Court still believes in the Constitution with laws opposing the Obama juggernaut.

gagrice · June 2009

More of the story:

Chrysler claims the agreement with Fiat is the best deal it can get for its assets and is critical to the company's plan to emerge from Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.

But a trio of Indiana state pension and construction funds, which hold a small part of Chrysler's debt, have been fighting the sale, claiming that it unfairly favors Chrysler's unsecured stakeholders ahead of secured debtholders like themselves.

As part of Chrysler's restructuring plan, the automaker's secured debtholders will receive $2 billion, or about 29 cents on the dollar, for their combined $6.9 billion in debt. The Indiana funds bought their $42.5 million in debt in July 2008 for 43 cents on the dollar.

The funds also are challenging the constitutionality of the Treasury Department's use of money from the Troubled Asset Relief Program to supply Chrysler's bankruptcy protection financing. They say the government did so without congressional authority.

Consumer groups and individuals with product-related lawsuits also are contesting a condition of the Chrysler sale that would release the company from product liability claims related to vehicles it sold before the "New Chrysler" partnered with Fiat is created.

Individuals with claims against "Old Chrysler" would have to seek compensation from the parts of the company not being sold to Fiat. But those assets have limited value and it's doubtful that there will be anything available to pay consumer claims.

The appeals come as Congress intensifies its scrutiny of the Obama administration's government-led restructuring of Chrysler and General Motors Corp. The Senate Banking Committee said it planned to call Ron Bloom, a senior adviser to the auto task force, and Edward Montgomery, who serves as the Obama administration's director of recovery for auto communities and workers, to a hearing Wednesday.

Sen. Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., the committee's chairman, planned to review the use of TARP funds to help the auto companies and look at whether taxpayers will receive a return on their investment.

GM and Chrysler executives faced questions last week from Congress over the elimination of hundreds of dealerships as part of the companies' reorganizations.

stever · June 2009

The order calls for a stay "pending further order by the undersigned or by the court."

Further review could come as soon as 8 am tomorrow. The Supremes can move pretty fast when they want to, and I suspect in this case they'll just bounce it back to Ginsburg. And my guess is that Ginsburg (or perhaps the entire panel, if they choose to hear it), will find a way uphold the bankruptcy judge - they have to know that liquidation is the only real alternative.

"The Treasury Department said in a statement that "we understand this to be an administrative extension designed to allow sufficient time for the Court to make a determination on the merits of the request for a stay."

But Jeremy Anwyl, CEO of auto research firm Edmunds.com, said GM and Treasury might not have been as willing to use bankruptcy as a way to reorganize the company if they had known the Supreme Court might slow the process."(CNN)

"Moments after her order was issued, Fiat Chief Executive Officer Sergio Marchionne said in a telephone interview that the company will never walk away from the deal. The company previously set a June 15 deadline for completion." (Bloomberg)

I think it's a few hours or few days premature to say what the court believes.

gagrice · June 2009

they have to know that liquidation is the only real alternative.

Yes and even as flaky as Ginsburg is, she knows that the Obama fast track bankruptcy tramples the Constitution something awful. So liquidate and pay those that are due their rightful money. All Obama is doing is pandering to the UAW on both GM and Chrysler. He is also prolonging what is inevitable, Liquidation for both failed companies. Let the auctions begin. The sooner they get done the sooner all concerned can rebuild their lives.

Who does Obama think he is kidding with selling the tax payers down the river? We are being bought by China. So GM will belong to China under his shady bankruptcy. Obama made it clear during the campaign that the Constitution would be targeted. This is just the beginning. Thankfully we have a separation of power. Bush circumvented the wish of Congress with the original bailout money and Obama figures that makes it fair game for him also. I am glad to see Congress finally doing their job.

If Fiat wants Chrysler, let them buy it at liquidation auction.

Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, in an order issued late Monday, granted a request for a delay of that approval sought by Indiana state pension funds, which had argued that they and other lenders deserved better treatment by the bankruptcy court.

I know many here would like to steal the money from the bondholders in both these Bankruptcy cases. It just is not right and it is NOT constitutional. I am sure that Obama knows that and was trying to fast track a deal to protect his UAW constituents.

gagrice · June 2009

I think it's a few hours or few days premature to say what the court believes.

I totally agree. I think when the outcome is made clear it will not be split down ideological lines. This is so basic it should have never been tried by the new hotshot in the WH.

Amazingly I agreed with the Liberal side of the court on their decision concerning "Judicial Bias" today.

stever · June 2009

The new hotshot has a big gun bankruptcy lawyer on the auto task force, so POTUS probably thought they could take on SCOTUS and get a Chapter 11 done.

Obama's man called shots on bankruptcy (Detroit Free Press - Feldman is the lawyer, not Ratner btw)

And yeah, electing judges, especially in Texas, is a bad idea. It's bad enough that rich jerks like the guy in WV can buy politicians, much less judges.

gagrice · June 2009

This statement by Obama's person on the ground says it all.

But in a filing Monday U.S. Solicitor General Elena Kagan, arguing for the administration, said the losses to the Indiana pension funds "cannot outweigh" the potential broader problems a collapse of Chrysler would present.

Is Obama our next Nixon? Where the "End justifies the Means"? Screw the school teacher retiree in Indiana to save the UAW and their big fat contributions to the Democrats. I hope our Supreme Court does the right thing and sets this bunch straight.

stever · June 2009

I wouldn't count on it. Strange things happen in bankruptcy court and the cards are stacked in favor of debtors, or used to be before the laws got changed a while back.

There are a lot of Indiana citizens wondering what the heck their state treasurer is doing fighting the merger too.

[Kokomo Mayor] "Goodnight continued, If the Chrysler-Fiat merger does not take place the services that state and local governments are expected to provide will be severely impacted if not eliminated, due to the economic crisis that will ensue. This will dwarf the losses Mr. Mourdock states a few Indiana bondholders may suffer. I can only hope that Mr. Mourdock has a plan to help the employees, retirees, communities, and supply-chain companies that are all tied to Chrysler and its future.

Mayor Goodnight: Mourdock Puts Kokomo in Jeopardy (howeypolitics.com)

Oh yeah, Mourdock is a Republican.

gagrice · June 2009

Mayor Goodnight should get a good attorney that can convince the SC to do away with the 5th amendment. The Teacher's Pension trust hired Mourdock to protect their interest from the goons in the Obama auto team. I felt they had a case from the start and still do. If it was my pension I would want him to do his best. Will the Mayor of Kokomo help out the pensioners that lose their money in the faux Chrysler C11? Obama is creating a country of dog eat dog, and this is just the beginning.

My daughter is living in Indiana and says you have to get to Walmart by 6:30 AM the days their ammunition shipment comes in or it is all gone within a short time. My son in law already had his concealed carry license. My daughter will get hers soon. They don't mess around with criminals in that part of Indiana.

stephen987 · June 2009

Are you serious? OBAMA is creating a country of dog eat dog? Dude, where the heck have you been for the last couple of decades? Ever heard of ENRON, WorldCom, AIG?

gagrice · June 2009

Ever heard of ENRON, WorldCom, AIG?

The Corporate world has always been Dog eat Dog. Obama is bringing it down to the man on the street. He is pitting you and I against our neighbors. When the price of food goes to where only the upper middle class and above can afford to eat you will understand what I am saying. When your utility bills are more than you can afford due to his Cap n Trade you will understand. When your wages are garnished to pay for a poorly run Federal health care plan it will become clear. When taxes are raised to pay for a bunch of worthless stimulus and bailouts it will bankrupt US all.

We could debate who gained from company failures for months and probably not agree. Ebbers will be in prison till 2028 for the MCI Worldcom Fraud, along with several others. Ken Lay died before serving time for the Enron scam. How many will go to prison over the AIG fraud?

kernick · June 2009

So Mr. Mourdock is of the opinion that a large company can never fail, and should never be allowed to? Why have many large companies failed in the past, and somehow we've all survived and prospered?

I say pull down the Chrysler signs, have Cerberus give back the loan money to Chrysler, sell the auto plants and tooling to someone like Penske, and start the auto companies over. If Fiat wants part of Chrysler let them bid for them at the Ch7 auction.

dtownfb · June 2009

If it was my pension I would want him to do his best. Will the Mayor of Kokomo help out the pensioners that lose their money in the faux Chrysler C11?

So you would be happy if your RETIREMENT investment manager bought junk bonds on a hunch? Remember Chrysler's credit rating was B- at the time they purchased these municipal bonds. Their rating was lowered to CCC later that month. Where is the responsibility of the investment manager in all of this mess?

kernick · June 2009

I think you're really minimizing the point that the managers knew that there was a certain pecking order to the assets in the bankruptcy law. Now the government is coming in and saying that in this particular case that they are suspending the law in this case, and that they will do what they like. That is rather dictatorial don't you think?

To me this whole bailout stinks, bankruptcy, sale in the auto and financial markets stinks of corruption and influence/power. The common person has lost wealth in real estate, investments, salary and jobs, and is threatened with higher taxes and loss of their contributions to social security; all to protect the wealth and power of the political and wealthy classes.

Our society has allowed the government to tax us in hundreds of ways, take a large share of GDP, and put it's tentacles into every aspect of our lives, and now we have a society too numb and impotent to say or do much against this corporate/government alliance that makes laws as it wants, and breaks promises.

Maybe tomorrow we'll wakeup and read that the government has lowered it's debt by only agreeing to pay $0.50 on the dollar on its Treasury Bills? Why not, right? All for the common good?

dtownfb · June 2009

I think you're really minimizing the point that the managers knew that there was a certain pecking order to the assets in the bankruptcy law. Now the government is coming in and saying that in this particular case that they are suspending the law in this case, and that they will do what they like. That is rather dictatorial don't you think?

My point is there are more people to blame than Presidents Obama and Bush. The money from the Indiana pension fund should never have been invested in bonds for Chrysler. Chrysler credit rating was B-. No competent investment manager invest pension funds in junk bonds. I am not well versed in bankruptcy. All I know is when Hank Paulson told Congress he needed $700 Billion dollars to save the banking system, the rules changed! You want to forget we are in the middle of a very deep recession caused by greed, deception, corruption, lackadasical oversight, and lies. We were not practicing capitalism the last decade. it was more "get what you can at anyone's expense". You want to forget we have 9.4% unemployment that can easily skyrocket to over 12% with a failure of GM and Chrysler. You want to forget that home foreclosures are still happening at alarming rates. Not a good thing no matter who you believe is to blame. Your answer to all of this is "let them fail, someone else will step in and we will be fine."

To me this whole bailout stinks, bankruptcy, sale in the auto and financial markets stinks of corruption and influence/power. The common person has lost wealth in real estate, investments, salary and jobs, and is threatened with higher taxes and loss of their contributions to social security; all to protect the wealth and power of the political and wealthy classes.

We agree but I have witnessed first hand the wealthy and powerful lose their wealth as well. This recession is touching everyone. The Madoff's and Stanford's of the investment world screwed over everyone who had enough money to invest in them. (watching the Stanford story on CNBC, what an arrogant a** wipe)

Agree that some of the taxes bother me. But I expected this way back in February 2008 when the media finally focused on the economy during the primaries.

We are living in strange times. I am hopeful we can turn this spending around in a couple of years. Bernanke's message to Congress last week will hopefully wake them up. Who knows? All I can control is my household finances. That is going well and should be out of debt in 14-18 months (minus the house). I figure I can handle anything the government can throw at me.

stever · July 2009

Interesting article about warranty accruals and claims made. Fiat had unrealistically low claims rates but newer numbers look more typical. The accrual rates of Fiat, BMW and Daimler were almost the same in both 2005 and 2008.

WarrantyWeek

iluvmysephia1 · May 2010

the new Fiat-sler Giardinetta "wagon". Car~nuts this may indeed be my next car purchased if Fiat-sler brings it to the NA market. Whoo-hoo! 4-doors and a nice shade of red with that trademark 500 bodystyle, too? Yes!

Here's what will keep my dream going, too. A 5 or 6-speed tranny, or a competent automatic CVT tranny. Boy howdy!

What could actually happen production wise is a more blunted C-pillar, one that has the roof going back a tad further and then the slant coming in towards the rear wheels. But who knows right now, car fiends. That might break the 500 tradition and I'm sure Fiat doesn't want anything ta do with doing that. I am really excited about this and I sure hope Fiat...I...I mean Fiat-Sler

will build this puppy in the Midwestern U.S. and sell it here. I'll have ta check and see where my nearest Chrysler dealer is. Elko might just have one. Wow. This changes everything baby! What happens in Vegas stays in Vegas, baby!

I will be following this one like Gary Payton all over Michael Jordan in the NBA playoffs. And that is close for those of you not possessing your thinking caps.

Chrysler and Fiat - Italian-American Flavor?

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles