Chrysler Going Bankrupt: Fiat Merger Ahead

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Nickdfresh
    SUPER MODERATOR

    • Oct 2004
    • 49127

    Chrysler Going Bankrupt: Fiat Merger Ahead

    January 21, 2009
    Chrysler and Fiat form a global alliance

    Chrysler-200C-EV In the high stakes game of "Bankruptcy or No Bankruptcy," Chrysler Corp. got a lifeline from Fiat. The two automakers have announced a global alliance that provides Chrysler with a much-needed save during desperate times.

    The cash-less partnership will give Fiat a 35-percent equity interest in Chrysler. In return, Chrysler gains product, platform, and powertrain sharing, with the promise of fuel-efficient engines. In short, Chrysler gains an imported solution to its home-grown problems.

    Chrysler has a product portfolio skewed toward midsize and large vehicles, emphasizing power over fuel efficiency. There simply are no small, truly thrifty vehicles available from Chrysler, Dodge, or Jeep dealerships, leaving the struggling automaker conspicuously absent from vital budget-priced segments. The PT Cruiser is about as close as the company comes, and this merely average, long-running model is overdue for retirement.

    The most fuel-efficient current product we have tested from Chrysler is the Dodge Caliber. With a manual transmission, the four-cylinder Caliber average 25 mpg overall in our fuel economy tests—not bad considering it was the supercharged SRT model. However, in most vehicle segments, Chrysler provides middling mileage, at best.

    Overall, Chrysler has Detroit's poorest reliability. Almost two-thirds of its models get a below-average reliability Rating. Chrysler as a brand ranks 32nd among 34 brands included in our latest Reliability survey. Among all models, the Sebring Convertible is the worst; it has 283 percent more problems than average.

    In the U.S., Fiat has never been a brand that resonated with reliability. Looking back at Reliability ratings from the late 1970s, we found the Fiat 128 and 131 received a "worse" overall Reliability rating for several years. However, overseas data shows that Fiat rates above average in the What Car? Reliability Index in the U.K.

    Many Chrysler Corp. models have a lackluster driving experience and subpar fit and finish. Based on our testing, Chrysler needs to give its model line a major overhaul and raise its reliability, interiors, fuel economy, and overall refinement up to the level of its styling. Such work has begun, with positive signs shown in the 2009 Dodge Ram pickup truck, a model currently undergoing testing; so far, we think the Ram has improved. Ultimately, Chrysler’s critical weaknesses speak to areas the new alliance may be able to better address than the company could tackle alone, as history has shown when it was merged with Daimler. (Read our Detroit Report Card.)

    Even with the new partnership, Chrysler continues to seek aid from American taxpayers. (Read Consumer Reports' statement on the emergency aid.) After all, Fiat isn’t investing capital in Chrysler, and it will take money to restructure and develop new models. However, the potential cost savings from product and technology sharing, as well as distribution potential and joint supplier negotiations, could enrich both automakers in the long run.

    An interesting footnote, this arrangement will mean the majority of Chrysler Corp. ownership is foreign, with Fiat claiming 35 percent and Daimler retaining almost 20 percent – though Daimler has sought to divest its interests.

    A strong, solvent Chrysler with clever, fuel-efficient models inspired by the Fiat 500, Grande Punto, Panda, and Qubo, plus the potential for Alfa Romeo to return to the United States, all sounds good to me.

    —Jeff Bartlett
    For complete Ratings and recommendations on appliances, cars & trucks, electronic gear, and much more, subscribe today and have access to all of ConsumerReports.org.

    Related: Chryslers new small car the Fiat 500?
    Last edited by Nickdfresh; 01-23-2009, 11:41 AM.
  • Nickdfresh
    SUPER MODERATOR

    • Oct 2004
    • 49127

    #2
    I find this fascinating since I can't imagine a more automotive odd-couple...

    But if they can hold out for the next two years or so, I think this would work unlike the Daimler debacle...

    Comment

    • FORD
      ROTH ARMY MODERATOR

      • Jan 2004
      • 58755

      #3
      The Germans couldn't save Chrysler, so now the Italians get a shot? OK, whatever.... as long as Berlusconi doesn't own Fiat. (He's Italy's answer to Chimpy and Rupert Murdoch all rolled into one)
      Eat Us And Smile

      Cenk For America 2024!!

      Justice Democrats


      "If the American people had ever known the truth about what we (the BCE) have done to this nation, we would be chased down in the streets and lynched." - Poppy Bush, 1992

      Comment

      • LoungeMachine
        DIAMOND STATUS
        • Jul 2004
        • 32555

        #4
        FIX
        IT
        AGAIN
        TONY

        Had one on the 80's

        Makes the Yugo seem like Lexus
        Originally posted by Kristy
        Dude, what in the fuck is wrong with you? I'm full of hate and I do drugs.
        Originally posted by cadaverdog
        I posted under aliases and I jerk off with a sock. Anything else to add?

        Comment

        • Nickdfresh
          SUPER MODERATOR

          • Oct 2004
          • 49127

          #5
          Originally posted by LoungeMachine
          FIX
          IT
          AGAIN
          TONY

          Had one on the 80's

          Makes the Yugo seem like Lexus

          They've improved quite a bit and are one of the above average quality Euro-cars...

          Still, I'd like to see them go beyond a couple Fiat models and bring some Alfa's, which I think they will eventually...

          Comment

          • Big Train
            Full Member Status

            • Apr 2004
            • 4011

            #6
            Makes a whole lot of sense if they can make it work. My guess is Chrysler will be dumping a lot of designs overboard in short order (charger, challenger, some truck stuff) and downsizing quite a bit. It is what they had to do all along. Mercedes never really worked themselves into what Chrysler was doing, it seemed more like a financing deal. With Cerebus guys running Chrysler now, I'm sure they will.

            This is what should happen to Ford and GM too. Part the brands out to different owners and let them fix them up. The workers (most) will still have a car to build in much better hands. Think of all the brands GM owns that aren't worth shit at the moment. Buick, Olds, Pontiac. In the hands of people who want to fix it (i.e. PE firms, foreign financed consortiums), they could be viable again in 5-10 years, when American ownership could buy it back and starting fucking it up again.

            Comment

            • Seshmeister
              ROTH ARMY WEBMASTER

              • Oct 2003
              • 35159

              #7
              I'm not clear what Fiat are getting out of this.

              Also I don't think Fiat reliability is not up there with Jap cars or European Fords. The only Fiat I ever had was a Fiat Coupe Turbo thing which was great until it gradually fet to pieces over 18 months. It was also unique in that you could only fit half a cigarette in the ashtray and then it was full. Right enough in this new world of helath and safety some cars don't even come with an ashtray any more.

              This is a typical Chrysler review in Europe...



              Jeremy Clarkson

              Many people imagine when they rent a convertible in America that they’ll be thumping down Highway 1 under a blazing sky in a throbbing Corvette or an evocative Mustang. Yum yum, they think. Freedom. Sunshine. A V8 bass line. Engineer boots, leather jackets and tight blue jeans. The American dream.

              Sadly, however, most tourists end up with a Chrysler Sebring convertible, which is almost certainly the worst car in the entire world.

              My journey in this automotive horror story began in Wendover. Famous for being a base used by the Enola Gay back in 1945, it lies on the border between Utah and Nevada. So half the town is full of man mountains emptying what’s left of their savings into MGM’s shiny and very noisy slots. And the other half is full of Donny Osmond. As you can imagine, I was in a hurry to leave and so I piled, along with my Top Gear colleagues, into the rented Sebring and set off for Denver.

              Immediately, I was annoyed by a nonstop whining sound from the back. This turned out to be Richard Hammond, who, despite being 8in tall, claimed that he had never been so uncomfortable in his life, apart from when he was being born. “Only that,” he said, “was more spacious.”

              After several hours of continuous moaning, he changed his tack. I’d selected a “classic vinyl” station on the car’s satellite radio and this did not meet with his approval. As a fan of Westlife and Girls Aloud, he didn’t see why James May and I were air-drum-ming our way across the salt flats to a nonstop selection of brilliance from Supertramp, Yes and the Allman Brothers. Eventually, Hocus Pocus by Focus drove him into such a frenzy of whingeing, we could take no more and drowned him out by turning up Steve Miller to the max.

              I can only presume that when Steve went from Phoenix, Arizona, all the way to Tacoma, he was not at the wheel of a Sebring, or the song would have been rather different. “I went from Phoenix, Arizona, to the other side of the city and then I went home again.”

              Certainly, we only got as far as Salt Lake City in our rented car before we ditched it and resorted to the services offered by Delta. It had been 120 miles of abject misery, and not only because of the unswervingly pissed-off Richard Hammond.

              Let us look, first of all, at the car’s only good point. The boot is bigger than the hangar deck of a Nimitz class aircraft carrier. However, the drawback of driving a car with an aircraft carrier on the back is that it doesn’t look very good. No. That doesn’t cover it. It looks terrible. Hysterically awful. Anyone thinking of drawing up a list of the ugliest cars ever made will be forced to put this one at the top. I have seen more attractive boils.

              And disappointingly, if you push the button that lowers the roof - and then push it again because it isn’t working properly - you will find that a) all of the carrying capacity is lost, and that b) with no roof in place, everyone can see you at the wheel. This is very bad. Some, for sure, give you pitying looks. Mostly, though, they point and laugh.

              So how much do you have to pay for the privilege of being a laughing stock? Well in the US, it’s around $29,000 (£16,400). You could buy a clown suit for less and achieve much the same effect. Here, however, a 2.7 litre drop-top Sebring is £25,100 and at that price, I simply don’t know how the salesman keeps a straight face.

              Power? There isn’t any. Spec sheets show that in Britain, a 2.7 litre V6 will do 121mph and 0-62mph in 10.8.

              But 10.8 what? Years? Let me put it this way. It develops 185bhp, which is pretty much what Volvo can get these days from a 2.4 litre diesel.

              I’m afraid I have no idea which engine was fitted to my rental but I can tell you that all it did was convert fuel into noise. Put your foot down hard and after a while of nothing happening, the gearbox would lurch down a cog and the volume would increase. That was it.

              Sadly, there’s more bad news. Turning petrol into motion, as we know, is an expensive business, but turning it into sound is even worse. We managed just 18mpg. Quite why anyone would buy this rather than, say, a Volkswagen Eos, I simply do not know. You’d have to be so window-lickingly insane that you’d be banned from handling anything other than crayons.

              A Sebring can do nothing well. It was hopeless in crosswinds and the only option you need on a twisty road are sick bags. Interestingly, however, while the ride is very soft, the suspension still manages to crash about like a drawer full of cutlery when it is asked to deal with a small pothole.

              And of course, being an American rental car, it came with a warped disc brake and steering that was so out of whack it kept making a beeline for Wyoming. But the worst thing was the overwhelming sense from everything you touched that it had been built by someone who was being deliberately stupid or who was four years old. Life inside that bag of crap plastic gave me some idea of what it might be like to be a boiled sweet.

              We see this with so many American cars. Dynamically, some of them are pretty good these days. One or two are even a match for what the Chinese are doing. And by and large they are still extremely cheap. But there’s a very good reason for this. They are simply not built to last.

              I spent most of my time in America this time in a new Corvette ZR1. It is a fabulous car. Mesmerisingly fast, good looking and amazing value. But after three days the damn thing was beginning to disintegrate. It made me growl with annoyance and despair.

              But I think I know the problem. Because America is a new country, the people who live there have no sense of history. And if you have no concept of “the past”, it is extremely difficult to grapple with the idea of “the future”.

              If you think a bar established in 1956 is “old” then you will not understand the idea of next week. So why bother building for it?

              We see this short-termism in everything from the average American house, which falls over whenever the wind gets up, to the way chief executives are treated. In Japan, you are given 25 years before you are judged on whether you’ve turned the company around. In America, bosses are given two months. And if there’s been no financial about-turn, they are fired.

              AIG and Lehman Brothers got caught out because they were being run by people who live only in the here and now. They couldn’t see that it would all come crashing down in the future because there’s no such thing.

              I suppose eco-mentalists would use this argument as a stick to beat the pickup driving masses. But how can Hank and Billy-Bob think about the world ending in a thousand years when everything they know, everything they are, began a week last Tuesday?

              And this brings me on to the war in Iraq. They went in there, knowing that pretty quickly they could depose Saddam Hussein. But nobody in power stopped for a moment to think about what might happen next. And there you have it. The insurgency problem in Baghdad and the wonky gear lever on the Chrysler Sebring. They are both caused by exactly the same thing.

              And the only cure, frankly, is time. Give them 2,000 years and they might just start to understand what I’m on about. Until then, do not buy a Sebring. Do not rent one either. Close your eyes, hum and, hopefully, we can make it go away.

              THE CLARKSOMETER
              ENGINE 2736cc, six cylinders
              POWER 185bhp @ 6400rpm
              TORQUE 188 lb ft @ 4000rpm
              TRANSMISSION Six-speed auto
              FUEL/CO2 26.9mpg / 248g/km
              ACCELERATION 0-62mph: 10.8sec
              TOP SPEED 121mph
              PRICE £25,100
              ROAD TAX BAND G (£400 a year)
              RELEASE DATE Out now
              Clarkson’s verdict All that’s missing is the clown suit Chrysler

              Sebring Cabriolet 2.7 V6
              (No stars)

              Comment

              • Nickdfresh
                SUPER MODERATOR

                • Oct 2004
                • 49127

                #8
                Originally posted by Seshmeister
                I'm not clear what Fiat are getting out of this.
                ...
                A ready made American distribution system of dealerships for their cars. A network that is absolutely DESPERATE for this very sort of product as Chrysler/Dodge have nothing even remotely similar. I think they're having problems limiting themselves to just the European markets and there still is a boutique crowd over here that does pine for the new Alfa's and you can't get a Mini Cooper without signing up for a waiting list which can take months and months. This is why they're fast-tracking the Fiat 500 to this market...

                And on top of the crap that the Seabring was, the article failed to mention that their 2.7L engines tend to get gummed up with sludge if you aren't very anal and use stouter synthetic oils they don't bother telling you to use...
                Last edited by Nickdfresh; 01-24-2009, 04:16 PM.

                Comment

                • ELVIS
                  Banned
                  • Dec 2003
                  • 44120

                  #9
                  Fiat: Coming Back to America

                  April 8, 2009



                  CEO Marchionne believes the carmaker is too small to make it on its own. But is Chrysler the best partner?

                  By David Kiley and Carol Matlack

                  As Fiat (FIA.MI) and Chrysler negotiate an agreement with unions and banks that would seal their proposed alliance, the American team knows that a deal with the Italians may be the only way to avoid bankruptcy. For Fiat, the stakes aren't as high, but the talks represent the best chance yet for Chief Executive Sergio Marchionne to get U.S. drivers into his cars. "Marchionne is coming to America, and the only question is with whom, when, and for how much," says a senior Chrysler official involved in the talks.

                  Even before starting discussions with Chrysler, Marchionne had laid the groundwork to move Fiat back across the Atlantic after a 25-year hiatus. Last summer he approached Volkswagen (VLKAY), BMW (BMWG), Nissan (NSANY), Ford (F), and others to find a partner willing to help Fiat build and sell its cars in the U.S.

                  So why Chrysler? For starters, it's cheap. As in free. The proposed deal calls for Fiat to take a 20% stake in Chrysler in exchange for small-car technology. And if the two sides get a deal, the company will have $6 billion in federal money to spend on restructuring. Marchionne, meanwhile, could tap Chrysler's dealer network to sell Fiats within a year or two. Chrysler "could be the least expensive way into the U.S. for Fiat," says former Chrysler President Thomas Stallkamp.

                  Many in the industry, though, believe Fiat could get most of the benefits of a deal with fewer management headaches by purchasing selected assets out of bankruptcy. The Italians could cherry-pick key dealerships and buy a low-wage factory. Marchionne could also skip Chrysler altogether and get Saturn on the cheap from General Motors (GM) or hire Ford to make vehicles in underutilized plants. (The two build cars together in Poland.) "The management time and distraction [running Chrysler] will be so large that it's tough to see the benefit for Fiat," says Max Warburton, a Bernstein Research (AB) analyst. Marchionne declined to be interviewed while talks are ongoing.

                  Quick and Lean
                  Teaming up with Chrysler offers one big advantage: speed. Overnight, Fiat would get U.S. distribution and access to Chrysler knowhow to adapt its cars to U.S. tastes and standards. And Marchionne is in a hurry. He has repeatedly predicted that a wave of consolidation will leave only a half-dozen major automakers worldwide within two years. As the industry's No. 9 player, Fiat sold just 2.1 million vehicles last year, less than half the

                  5.5 million Marchionne says is needed for sustained profitability. The question is whether Chrysler can survive long enough to get the Chrysler-Fiat models into U.S. showrooms.

                  The Fiat CEO knows how to move fast. Fiat was on the verge of bankruptcy when he took over in 2004. He quickly laid off hundreds of executives and built a leaner team, including younger managers from Fiat's South American operations and its U.S.-based farm equipment subsidiary, Case New Holland (CNH). By last year, Fiat was back in the black and had one of the healthiest profit margins in the industry. "There used to be a joke at Fiat: The main thing they produced was organization charts," says Karl Ludvigsen, an independent auto consultant who was a Fiat executive in the pre-Marchionne era. Now, he says, "People's energy has been released to make the changes that are necessary."


                  Comment

                  • redblkwht
                    Full Member Status

                    • Jan 2004
                    • 4616

                    #10
                    Just checked out Fiat's website

                    Jeez, alot changed since i had my spider..lol used to have to run it down the
                    block to start sometimes.
                    those were the days!!lol

                    EUAS

                    Comment

                    • twonabomber
                      formerly F A T
                      ROTH ARMY WEBMASTER

                      • Jan 2004
                      • 11202

                      #11
                      Marchionne could also skip Chrysler altogether and get Saturn on the cheap from General Motors
                      earlier this week i read that Saturn is likely to be sold to one of the Chinese automakers.

                      they have been talking about bringing Alfa Romeo back for a while.

                      Maserati and Ferrari are also Fiat Group brands. some of that tech would have to roll downhill eventually.
                      Last edited by twonabomber; 04-09-2009, 02:27 AM.
                      Writing In All Proper Case Takes Extra Time, Is Confusing To Read, And Is Completely Pointless.

                      Comment

                      • Seshmeister
                        ROTH ARMY WEBMASTER

                        • Oct 2003
                        • 35159

                        #12
                        The way it's going in a few years there will only be 1 car company.

                        Comment

                        • ELVIS
                          Banned
                          • Dec 2003
                          • 44120

                          #13
                          Yeah, Honda...


                          Comment

                          • ELVIS
                            Banned
                            • Dec 2003
                            • 44120

                            #14
                            This seems fitting...

                            <object width="500" height="405"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/eXQf0JG8Uj8&hl=en&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x402061&color 2=0x9461ca&border=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/eXQf0JG8Uj8&hl=en&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x402061&color 2=0x9461ca&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="500" height="405"></embed></object>


                            Comment

                            • Seshmeister
                              ROTH ARMY WEBMASTER

                              • Oct 2003
                              • 35159

                              #15
                              Originally posted by ELVIS
                              Yeah, Honda...


                              Well as long as it isn't Chevrolet.

                              Comment

                              Working...