Chrysler New Yorker Salon 1 Owner Georgia Owned 80k Miles Local Trade No Reserve on 2040-cars

Auto blog

MotorWeek retro review revisits the Chrysler PT Cruiser

I have a long history with the Chrysler PT Cruiser. My mom was working at Automobile magazine when it launched, and she brought home their long-term tester all the time. My buddy Adam's mom bought one in the early 2000s, and I drove it on many an occasion. When I left Winding Road in early 2010 and joined Autoblog, the car I got on Day 1 was... well, I think you can guess. I will never forget driving that 2010 PT Cruiser to a rest stop outside of Toledo, Ohio, to meet then editor-in-chief John Neff and buy his old camera. I will also never forget the look on Neff's face when he pulled into the parking lot in his 1991 Ford Taurus SHO, saw the PT, and started laughing. I have always hated this car. But when it launched around the turn of the millennium, it was a huge deal – not just for Chrysler, but for the industry. Retro styling was all the rage, and the PT had it in spades. On top of that, it was seriously functional – one of the first widely accepted tall hatchbacks in an era where Americans wanted sedans. MotorWeek has now dug up its original PT Cruiser review for its latest retro review offering. Watch the video above to see what the ever-charismatic John Davis and his crew thought of the PT way back when it was actually relevant.

FCA revises Renault merger offer in a bid to persuade French government

PARIS – Fiat Chrysler is discussing a Renault special dividend and stronger job guarantees in a bid to persuade the French government to back its proposed merger between the carmakers, sources close to the discussions said. The improved offer, if formalized and accepted, would also see the combined company's operations headquartered in France and the French state granted a seat on its board, two people with knowledge of the matter told Reuters on Sunday. FCA spokeswoman Shawn Morgan declined to comment. The French government, Renault's biggest shareholder with a 15 percent stake, also declined to comment. A Renault spokesman did not return calls and messages seeking comment. Italian-American FCA is engaged in intensive discussions with Renault and the French government over the $35 billion merger proposal it pitched last Monday to create the world's third-biggest carmaker. The concessions being discussed are not definitive and depend on other aspects of an emerging compromise deal, both sources cautioned. They nonetheless increase the chances that the merger plan will be approved by Renault's board, on which the French state has two seats. The board meets again on Tuesday. Some analysts and French industry leaders had voiced doubts about the 5 billion euros ($5.6 billion) in claimed cost and investment savings, and whether the proposal represents a fair deal for Renault shareholders. A Renault dividend would improve the valuation in their favor, balancing a 2.5 billion euro proposed dividend to FCA shareholders. The sources did not elaborate on the potential size of a Renault payout. The merger plan presented on Monday would see the two carmakers acquired by a listed Dutch holding company whose ownership would be split equally between current FCA and Renault shareholders, after special dividend payments. FCA had proposed locating the combined group's operational head office in a neutral city, most likely London, but has now indicated readiness to base it in the greater Paris area, meeting a key French government demand, both sources said. The French government is also likely to be granted a seat on the board to reflect its 7.5 percent stake in the merged company, the people said. Nissan, whose matching 15 percent stake in its French alliance partner will also be diluted to 7.5 percent of the new group, receives a board seat under the plan unveiled on May 27.

Buy Ford and GM stock and make 5%

Want to make a five-percent return when 10-year treasuries are paying around two percent? Ford (F) and General Motors (GM) have solid balance sheets, strong cash flow, solid earnings, and growing markets. By all accounts, they are smart investments. But the market is down on these stocks. Why? Some of the stupid excuses include: They are cyclical companies The Detroit 3 have lost 3.5 million in sales since 2000 The world economy is shaky GM recently filed for bankruptcy Their markets have peaked They haven't changed their ways Let's take these criticisms one by one: They Are Cyclical Companies Yes, they are cyclical. Every company is cyclical. Every industry is cyclical. Some more than others, but not every company is immune from swings in the market. Banks used to be 'non-cyclical' leader, not anymore. Airline stocks are just as cyclical as auto stocks, yet they are trading at multiples greater than the auto industry. Why? And what accounts for the irrational stock price for Tesla (TSLA)? At least Ford (F) and General Motors (GM) make money and have positive cash flows. In fact, both companies have a net positive cash position. They have more cash on hand than liabilities. Auto sales in the United States hit a record 17.5 million vehicles in 2015. During the Great Recession, Ford (F) and General Motors (GM) cut their break even points to 10 million vehicles per year. Anything above an annual U.S. volume of 10 million vehicles is profit. And what a profit they make. Sales of Ford's F-150 continues to be the best-selling vehicle in the United States for over 30 years. Detroit 3 Have Lost 3.5 million in Sales Since 2000 Automotive News reports General Motors (GM), Ford (F) and Chrysler (FCA) have lost a combined 3.5 million vehicles sales since 2000. So how can they be making more money? Two big reasons – Fleet Sales and the UAW. Fleet Sales The Detroit 3 used to own car rental companies to keep their factories running. Ford owned Hertz (HTZ), General Motors owned all of National Car Rental and 29 percent of Avis, and Chrysler, the forerunner to Fiat Chrysler (FCA), used to own Thrifty Car Rental and Dollar Rent-A-Car. The Detroit 3 owned these rental companies to have a place to sell their bad product and keep their factories running. These were low margin sales, and in many cases, were money losers for the Detroit 3. They no longer own auto rental companies.