1990 Chrysler New Yorker Fifth Avenue Sedan 4-door 3.3l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

FCA posts $716m profit in 2014, has big plans for 2015

In practically every metric, Fiat Chrysler Automobiles announced growing worldwide earnings for 2014 in its latest financial release. The automaker sold 4.608 million vehicles globally for the year, a 6-percent jump, and total revenue grew 11 percent to 96.090 billion euros ($109 billion). Profits before taxes also increased by 161 million euros ($182 million) from last year to 1.176 billion euros ($1.3 billion). However, net profits did tumble by 1.319 billion euros ($1.5 billion) to a total of 632 million euros ($716 million). These figures put FCA slightly ahead of what some analysts expected. According to Automotive News, the company's adjusted earnings before taxes and interest of 3.651 billion euros ($4.1 billion) beat a forecast figure of 3.4 billion euros ($3.9 billion). Regionally, Europe is showing signs of a comeback. FCA lost 109 million euros ($123 million) there in 2014, but that was almost a triumph compared to the 506 million euro ($573 million) loss in 2013. According to Automotive News, North America played a major role in the company's success, accounting for 55 percent of its revenue. While these annual figures show growth, FCA is even more optimistic about its prospects in 2015. The company is forecasting shipments of between 4.8 and 5 million vehicles worldwide next year. It also estimates earnings before interest and taxes to reach 4.1 billion and 4.5 billion euros ($4.6 billion – $5.1 billion). You can read FCA's full results in PDF format, here. While this release focuses on worldwide figures, FCA US, previously known as Chrysler Group, announces its US results on February 3. News Source: Fiat Chrysler Automobiles, Automotive News - sub. req. Earnings/Financials Chrysler Fiat FCA fiat chrysler automobiles

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...

Feds investigating FCA sales fraud focusing on strange code word

The US government is currently investigating Fiat Chrysler Automobiles (FCA) over the possibility of sales fraud, and according to The Wall Street Journal, the investigation has revealed a strange phrase about a nonexistent "unnatural acts department." People knowledgeable about the term told The Wall Street Journal that this phrase was a "rallying cry." Basically, if it looked like the company, region, or dealer wasn't going to hit sales targets, this was a sign that some outside-the-box sales solutions were needed. People told the news outlet those solutions could include selling cars at a loss or having the dealer buy a fleet of customer test-drive cars. However, this could also be evidence of some less savory ways to boost sales. In addition to the investigation, the company is already facing at least one lawsuit from a dealer group that alleges it would bribe dealers to pad monthly sales figures. FCA had an incentive to maintain sales numbers as well, considering that it was claiming a long streak of increasing sales. Under scrutiny recently, the company changed its sales reporting practices and numbers for previous years. Under the old reporting methods, it was possible for dealers to sell cars, report the sales, and then cancel or "unwind" the sales later. This wouldn't count as a lost sale, but the car also couldn't be recorded as another sale later. As a result, an unscrupulous dealer could have hypothetically used it to "sell" a car one month and "unwind" it the next. If FCA knew about this, it's also possible the company could have pushed dealers to use the system for false sales, something the Feds theorize may be related to the "unnatural acts department" phrase. It's still entirely possible this "unnatural acts department" was just a corporate term for thinking of creative ways to meet sales goals. And selling cars at a loss is definitely unnatural for businesses that are trying to make money. Whatever the phrase truly meant to dealers, it certainly is bizarre. Related Video: News Source: The Wall Street JournalImage Credit: GIUSEPPE CACACE/AFP/Getty Images Government/Legal Chrysler Fiat FCA fiat chrysler automobiles fca us investigation