Simply Pristine 1 Owner 1977 Chrysler New Yorker Brougham Second To None Sweet on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Marchionne hopes Apple will partner with Fiat

Apple wants to make a car. Fiat already makes cars. Therefore, Apple and Fiat should partner to make an Apple Car. Makes sense, right? Clearly, it's not quite that easy, but FCA chief Sergio Marchionne hopes that Cupertino will consider Fiat a worthy candidate for partnership, assuming, of course, that Apple follows through with its overtures into the automobile industry. Marchionne is, according to Bloomberg, a self-proclaimed "Apple freak" who owns every kind of product Apple makes. He suggests that he understands the tech company's needs and wants. "Apple has a language, and you have to be able to speak that language," said Marchionne. "Usually the industry comes into that dialogue with a high degree of arrogance as we know how to make cars. That's not very helpful as their syntax is worth more than our ability to build cars." By "syntax," we assume Marchionne means Apple's sleek and modern design language more than the code behind its software. It's interesting to note that the FCA CEO seems to indicate that Apple would bring more to any partnership than the automaker would. Fair or not, we'd wager that more buyers would care about a potential Apple Car's design and branding than would be concerned with which automaker helped assembled it. A partnership with Apple may be exactly the kind of cure that the FCA CEO believes ails the auto industry. After finding it impossible to further pursue industry consolidation, a tie-up with the massive tech industry, particularly Apple, could generate some much-needed positive cash flow. At present, though, it's all just conjecture – Apple hasn't offered any hints as to the true nature of its so-called Project Titan automotive project, and doesn't seem likely to anytime soon. Related Video:

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...

Fiat stock rockets up after word of Chrysler deal

Now that Fiat has finalized a deal to purchase the outstanding shares of Chrysler owned by the United Auto Workers' VEBA retiree heathcare fund without having to file for an IPO, you can count the Italian automaker's stockholders among the happy. The Detroit News reports that Fiat stock closed Thursday with a 12-percent gain for the day on the Borsa Italiana, having been up by as much as 15.8 percent during the day's trading, at prices not seen since mid-2011. One trader reasoned the run was because Fiat "paid less than the market had expected and there will be no capital increase to fund this."
But there are some who worry, including bank analysts and unions. The final price of the stake will be $4.35 billion - $1.9 billion in cash from Chrysler, $1.75 billion from Fiat and extraordinary dividends in the amount of $700 million paid over three years. Adding that sum to its ledger will raise Fiat's debt level to roughly 10 billion euros ($13.8 billion), which Citibank says will make it the most indebted OEM in Europe.
Italian unions are also concerned about what the deal means for the future. Fiat CEO Sergio Marchionne has had an at-times contentious relationship with both unions and the Italian government over the future of Italian manufacturing, a fact that makes headlines because Fiat is Italy's largest private employer. At least two left-leaning unions have publicly called on Fiat to give guarantees and to explain what the deal means for its Italian operations, while a centrist union argues this is "good news for Fiat workers, for the auto industry and for our country."