đź“° Auto News HUGE BREAKING NEWS: GM and Chrysler talking about merger

Mook

Mr. Manager
Staff member
Admin
May 23, 2007
207,179
119,016
Elgin
Real Name
Mike
mushroom-cloud_gm_chrysler_450.jpg


Our heads are still reeling from one of the most tumultuous financial weeks on record, and the auto industry was far from immune. But despite our best efforts to drown our concerns in Racer5 IPA, the hits keep coming, and this time it's courtesy of the New York Times.

The Gray Lady is reporting that General Motors and Chrysler have been in talks about a possible merger for the past month, that "negotiations are not certain to produce a deal," "would most likely still take weeks to work out" and that two unnamed sources say that the chances of the merger going through are "50-50." Obfuscate much?

With GM's stock prices ending the week below $5 a share and Cerberus – the private equity firm that owns Chrysler – grasping at the flimsiest of straws, including continued talks with Nissan/Renault, a merger of unequals is two parts disturbing and one part intriguing.

Cerberus' people haven't been returning phone calls and the only comment offered to the NYT from the General's spokesperson, Tony Cervone, was, "Without referencing that specific rumor, as we've often said at GM officials routinely discuss issues of mutual interest with other automakers." Broad, unclear and exactly what we'd expect.

The merger of GM and Chrysler would put Cerberus in charge of an "unspecified equity stake" in the corporation, making the two-headed General-Chrysler (or Chrysler Motors?) the world's largest automaker, controlling over 35 percent of the U.S. vehicle market, causing rifts among brand faithful and offering more potential (vehicle) cannibalization than the Donner Party. Not to mention both automakers' labor contracts, supplier dealers and slipping market share. Shocked? Don't be. We give it a snowball's chance on the Sun.

400px-Logo-autoblog-com.gif
 

Bru

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
TCG Premium
May 24, 2007
40,511
10,220
I wonder what GM would lose if Chrysler went under, like fully gone. That must be the only reason why they're considering this. It must hurt GM somehow to lose Chrysler, and Chrysler is in really poor shape right now, more so than the others.
 

Poopshinanigans

I'm a middle of the titties voter.
Nov 18, 2007
5,948
0
Would chrysler faithful rather go Ford than GM?

This is just like those rumors of Toyota buying GM a couple years ago. Why would GM want to take part in the eternal hemorrhage that is Chrysler when it has its own problems. Maybe the Big Three should just merge together and get it over with.
 

Mook

Mr. Manager
Staff member
Admin
May 23, 2007
207,179
119,016
Elgin
Real Name
Mike
The Detroit News is reporting that GM is considering absorbing Chrysler under a takeover deal, then phasing the automaker out of existence. Similar to the Chrysler takeover of AMC in 1987, GM would eliminate overlapping models, integrate its own parts and engineering into the remainder and likely dump the Chrysler and Dodge brands. Analysts predict that GM would keep the Jeep brand as well as Chrysler's minivan models, adding them to its own product lines. If such a scenario were to occur, GM would gain Chrysler's roughly $11 billion in cash and remove a competitor who now accounts for approximately 1.5 million units per year. But is GM willing to risk the enormous political and economic pitfalls that would surely follow?

Gerald Meyers, former AMC chairman turned U of M business professor says, "The others (automakers) will be delighted to have Chrysler just die and take 1.5 million units out of the industry, which is about what the excess is." And indeed, the elimination of a major automaker may be precisely what's needed to right-size the industry. But the nationwide cost in terms of lost jobs and plant closures would be massive.

GM and Chrysler are both struggling with overcapacity and an oversupply of dealerships; combining the two would simply give the resulting entity an excuse to shed tremendous redundancy in one fell swoop. Problem is, most of those redundant assets have families to feed and bills to pay; the impact to Michigan's already-fragile economy would be devastating, but every state in the union would feel some of the effects.

So what do you to if you're GM? Save yourself at the expense of tens of thousands of jobs? Would the result lead to a GM that's healthy and profitable again, or would it stave off the inevitable bankruptcy filing and lead to a generation of ill-will toward the automaker from families ruined by its scorched-earth takeover of Chrysler? We don't know the answer, but we certainly hope GM's corporate captains are asking the hard questions before making any far-reaching moves.

jalopnik.png
 

Poopshinanigans

I'm a middle of the titties voter.
Nov 18, 2007
5,948
0
On one side, yes its sad that all those people would lose their jobs. On another it Could save GM from certain doom. Eat the weakling to save the stronger ones, they troubles of the many out weigh the few type of deal. I like Chrysler, they have a strong history, but they've never truly recovered from their 1980s bailout, K-cars helped out a little. 90's came along, in trouble LH cars helped; 00's came around, in trouble LX cars helped; 2010 is coming soon, big trouble but what will save them? It just seems that every ten years after they get a jump start that they squander it some how. That Daimler "merger" didn't help at all either.

If GM does buy then gets rid of Chrysler, they can always bring them back in the future when the market is better.
 

Mook

Mr. Manager
Staff member
Admin
May 23, 2007
207,179
119,016
Elgin
Real Name
Mike
The WSJ reports today Cerberus and GM are moving full-steam-ahead in their efforts to get a GM-Chrysler deal done by the end of October. Today also brings news Renault may have their hand in the cookie jar too, negotiating for one or more parts of Chrysler and leading to speculation the Auburn Hills, MI-based automaker could be divvied up among several companies: Basically the worst-case scenario envisioned when Cerberus Capital Management took over in 2007. Finally, we've got an unsubstantiated rumor engineering employees at Chrysler may be getting two months off sans pay beginning...drumroll please...November 1st. Coincidence? Maybe. UPDATE: We now hear from a Chrysler PR source that rumors of an engineering furlough are not true; that's why we call them "rumors."

.
 
Old Thread: Hello . There have been no replies in this thread for 90 days.
Content in this thread may no longer be relevant. Consider starting a new thread to get fresh replies.

Thread Info