We Finance! 2008 Chrysler Aspen Limited 4wd Power Sunroof Navigation on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Fiat Chrysler's London offices will be small, with financial focus

Fiat Chrysler's decision to locate its new corporate headquarters in jolly old London won't herald a sprawling relocation effort. Instead, it's very likely that the FCA outfit will be a small one, primarily focused on finance.
The report comes from Automotive News Europe, which claims FCA's London office will employ about 50 people with backgrounds in finance. CEO Sergio Marchionne and Fiat Group Chairman John Elkann will both have offices at the corporate headquarters, as well.
ANE cites an anonymous source that claims the people employed at the London office will focus primarily on treasury operations. It's unlikely that FCA will take on any additional employees specifically for its UK offices. That said, FCA isn't likely to downsize either its Turin or Auburn Hills offices once London comes online.

Fiat's Marchionne ponders Chrysler going public again

Fiat boss Sergio Marchionne says there's a real possibility that its majority-owned Chrysler Group may eventually return to the ranks of publicly traded companies. According to Bloomberg, the Fiat and Chrysler CEO gives that a "50 percent chance" of happening, but he doesn't appear to favor that scenario: "My preference is to be one single company... we belong together."
Marchionne has seemingly been operating under the assumption that Fiat will eventually own all of Chrysler, working to buy up the shares it doesn't own and looking to buy out the retiree trust fund that it shares Chrysler ownership with. Certainly, Chrysler going independent again would be increasingly difficult, as the companies continue to blend products, technologies, facilities and staffing, a trend started immediately after the Italian automaker became custodian of the brand following Chrysler's bankruptcy in 2009.
Marchionne's remarks to the media came at Chrysler's Kokomo, Indiana plant, where he was on hand to announce a major investment at four facilities in the state to build eight- and nine-speed automatic transmissions.

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...