2014 Chrysler 300c Base on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Canada bailed out GM, Chrysler without really knowing what they were getting into

The Auditor General of Canada recently issued a report that makes at least one thing clear: it doesn't know how effective Canadian government loans given to General Motors and Chrysler in 2009 were in ensuring the viability of both companies. That year, the Canadian and Ontario governments dished out $10.8 billion CAD ($9.6B US) to GM and $2.9 billion CAD ($2.6B US) to Chrysler, but hadn't yet sorted out precisely how the funds were to be used before disbursing them. This happened in spite of the fact that, according to a piece in Bloomberg, the loans weren't meant to be handed out until authorities were clear on the manufacturers' plans for reorganization. In fact, federal officials hadn't finished establishing the concessions made by all the involved parties, the pension liabilities, nor the long-term soundness of the automakers' financial positions. On top of that, apparently it didn't keep close tabs on the money after loaning it: the report says that $1B CAD should have been applied to GM Canada pension plans but was instead given to GM to use. Chrysler repaid $1.7 billion, while GM handed back $3.8 billion and Bloomberg believes the feds in Ottawa still own 110 million shares of The General, which, at the stock price as of writing, would be good for another $3.9 billion. Those were mad, bad days, though, and we're not sure what point the report serves, other than to say, "Oh, by the way...." News Source: BloombergImage Credit: Bill Pugliano / Getty Images Government/Legal Chrysler GM bailout

China-FCA merger could be a win-win for everyone but politicians

NEW YORK — Fiat Chrysler boss Sergio Marchionne has said the car industry needs to come together, cut costs and stop incinerating capital. So far, his words have mostly fallen on deaf ears among competitors in Europe and North America. But it appears Marchionne has finally found a receptive audience — in China. FCA shares soared Monday after trade publication Automotive News reported the $18 billion Italian-American conglomerate controlled by the Agnelli family rebuffed a takeover from an unidentified carmaker from the Chinese mainland. As ugly as the politics of such a combination may appear at first blush, a transaction could stack up industrially, and perhaps even financially. A Sino-U.S.-European merger would create the first truly global auto group. That could push consolidation to the next level elsewhere. Moreover, China is the world's top market for the SUVs that Jeep effectively invented, so it might benefit FCA financially. A combo would certainly help upgrade the domestic manufacturer; Chinese carmakers have gotten better at making cars, but struggle to build global brands, and they need to develop export markets. Though frivolous overseas shopping excursions by Chinese enterprises are being reined in by Beijing, acquisitions that support the modernization and transformation of strategic industries still receive support, and the government considers the automotive industry to be strategic. A purchase of FCA by Guangzhou Automobile, Great Wall or Dongfeng Motors would probably get the same stamp of approval ChemChina was given for its $43 billion takeover of Syngenta. What's standing in the way? Apart from price (Automotive News said FCA's board deemed the offer insufficient) there's the not-insignificant matter of politics. Even as FCA shares soared, President Donald Trump interrupted his vacation to instruct the U.S. Trade Representative to look into whether to investigate China's trade policies on intellectual property. Seeing storied Detroit brands like Jeep, Chrysler, Ram and Dodge handed off to a Chinese company would provoke howls among Trump's economic-nationalist supporters. It might not play well in Italy, either, to see Alfa Romeo and Maserati answering to Wuhan instead of Turin — though Automotive News said they might be spun off separately. Yet, as Morgan Stanley observes, "cars don't ship across oceans easily," and political considerations increasingly demand local manufacture of valuable products.

The mad genius of killing the Dodge Dart and Chrysler 200

Sergio Marchionne isn't crazy. At least not with respect to the recent announcement that Fiat Chrysler Automobiles will cease production of the Dodge Dart and Chrysler 200. Instead of crazy I'd call this CEO ruthlessly pragmatic, and perhaps short-sighted. The latest revisions to FCA's most recent five-year plan tell some truths about the company's finances. In other words, it can't afford to build mainstream sedans. With only 87,392 units sold in 2015, the Dart is an also-ran in the segment. The axe falls easily there - Chrysler hasn't had a compact-car hit since the second-generation Neon. The 200 isn't so cut and dried: Last year sales increased 52 percent, and the 177,889 total for 2015 is more than those for the Subaru Legacy and Kia Optima. But looking at the overall FCA picture the Chrysler 200 has to go, at least from a short-term perspective. The vehicles that make big money – Ram trucks; Jeep's Cherokee, Grand Cherokee, and Wrangler – can't be made fast enough. FCA can't afford to idle the 200's Sterling Heights, MI, assembly plant to cut back on inventory when other plants are running flat out. It seems crazy to throw away 265,000 sales, but FCA is leaving money on the table by not building more profitable vehicles. The Wirecutter's Senior Autos Editor (and former Autoblogger) John Neff agrees. "As bold as it looks from the outside, he's really making a safe bet that their money is better spent on designing better and building more crossovers and trucks. He's probably right about that." But according to Jessica Caldwell, Executive Director of Strategic Analytics at Edmunds, "FCA's strategy of eliminating the Dart and 200 might be short-sighted if gas prices were to rise and Americans, once again, flocked to small vehicles. FCA must have plans to expand the lineup of small SUVs and position them as small-car alternatives in terms of price and fuel efficiency for this strategy to make sense." FCA's latest announcement focuses mainly on the profitable brands and nameplates. There's hardly a mention of Chrysler, Dodge, or Fiat. And future planning is where the plot holes appear. This realignment cuts dead weight from the product portfolio, but FCA's latest announcement focuses mainly on the profitable brands and nameplates. There's hardly a mention of Chrysler, Dodge, or Fiat. So what's Sergio up to? David Sullivan of AutoPacific thinks Marchionne is still looking for another CEO to hug.