Stunning 2007 Chrysler Crossfire Ltd. Convertible 3.5 V6 14,300 Miles on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Fiat talking with banks about buying rest of Chrysler

All that stands in the way of Fiat's total ownership of Chrysler is a 41.5-percent stake currently held by the United Auto Workers healthcare trust, but according to SFGate.com, Sergio Marchionne is currently trying to raise the capital to complete the acquisition. The article says that a deal could be completed in as soon as 12 months, and the estimate for the remaining stake could cost Fiat SpA around $2.98 billion.
With a goal of completing the deal by the end of 2014, Marchionne is said to be in talks with various banks to help finance some of the deal. According to the report, the banks have indicated a need for a stronger balance sheet, controlled debt and reserve cash.
Two things that don't seem to be on the table to get the deal completed include issuing new shares to raise the capital or selling a stake in Ferrari. Fiat started with a 20 percent share of Chrysler in June 2009, and it raised its stake up to 58.5 percent in January 2012.

Italian government to lean on Fiat's Marchionne to commit to country

With the recent chatter that Fiat is looking to move its global headquarters to the US following a complete merger with Chrysler, the Italian government is voicing its opinion on the matter. Facing the potential job loss from the automaker leaving the country, Italy's industry minister is meeting with Fiat CEO Sergio Marchionne in what will likely be a plea to keep the company based in Turin rather than moving to Auburn Hills, MI - if indeed it is able to acquire the additional 41.5 percent of Chrysler currently owned by the United Auto Workers.
According to Bloomberg, Fiat is Italy's biggest private employer and unemployment is already nearing a 20-year high. The non-car side of Fiat, Fiat Industrial, is already planning a move to the UK, so it goes without saying that Fiat moving would be a pretty big blow for the Italian economy. In the article, Fiat says that the headquarters issue is "not on its agenda now," but that statement is far from a denial.

This or That: 2005 Chrysler Crossfire SRT6 vs. 1984 Pontiac Fiero

Welcome to another round of This or That, where two Autoblog editors pick a topic, pick a side and pull no punches. Last round pitted yours truly against Associate Editor Brandon Turkus, and my chosen VW Vanagon Syncro narrowly defeated Brandon's 1987 Land Rover. In fact, it was, by far, the closest round we've seen, with 1,907 voters seeing things my way (for 50.8 percent of the vote) versus 1,848 votes for Brandon's Rover (49.2 percent). Sweet, sweet victory! For this latest round of This or That, I've roped Editor Greg Migliore into what I think is a rather fun debate. We've each chosen our favorite terrible cars, setting a price limit of $10,000 to make sure neither of us went too crazy with our automotive atrocities. I think we've both chosen terribly... and I mean that in the best way possible. 2005 Chrysler Crossfire SRT6 Jeremy Korzeniewski: Why It's Terrible: Taken in isolation, the Chrysler Crossfire isn't necessarily a terrible car. In fact, it drives pretty darn well, and there's a lot of solid engineering under its slinky shape. Problem is, that engineering was already rather long in the tooth well before Chrysler ever got its hands on it, having come from Mercedes-Benz, which used the basic chassis and drivetrain in a previous version of its SLK coupe and roadster. Granted, the SLK was an okay car, too, but even when new, it hardly set the world on fire with sporty driving dynamics. Chrysler took these decent-but-no-more bits and pieces from the Mercedes parts bin – remember, this car was conceived in the disastrous Merger Of Equals days – and covered them with a rather attractive hard-candy shell. Unfortunately, the super sporty shape wrote checks in the minds of buyers that its well-worn mechanicals were simply unable to cash, though an injection of power courtesy of a supercharged V6 engine in the SRT6 model, as seen here, certainly helped ease some of those woes. In the end, Chrysler was left with a so-called halo car that looked the part but never quite performed the part. It was almost universally panned by critics as an overpriced parts-bin special, which, I must add, was damningly accurate. As a result, sales were very slow, and within the first few months, dealers were clearancing the car at cut-rate prices, just to keep them from taking up too much of the showroom floor. Why It's Not That Terrible, After All: I can speak from personal experience when discussing the Chrysler Crossfire. You see, I owned one. Well, sort of...