Big 3 Automaker News

If I had the floor at the auto rescue talks
BY MITCH ALBOM • FREE PRESS COLUMNIST • November 23, 2008

OK. It's a fantasy. But if I had five minutes in front of Congress last week, here's what I would've said:

Good morning. First of all, before you ask, I flew commercial. Northwest Airlines. Had a bag of peanuts for breakfast. Of course, that's Northwest, which just merged with Delta, a merger you, our government, approved -- and one which, inevitably, will lead to big bonuses for their executives and higher costs for us. You seem to be OK with that kind of business.

Which makes me wonder why you're so against our kind of business? The kind we do in Detroit. The kind that gets your fingernails dirty. The kind where people use hammers and drills, not keystrokes. The kind where you get paid for making something, not moving money around a board and skimming a percentage.

You've already given hundreds of billions to banking and finance companies -- and hardly demanded anything. Yet you balk at the very idea of giving $25 billion to the Detroit Three. Heck, you shoveled that exact amount to Citigroup -- $25 billion -- just weeks ago, and that place is about to crumble anyhow.

Does the word "hypocrisy" ring a bell?

Protecting the home turf?

Sen. Shelby. Yes. You. From Alabama. You've been awfully vocal. You called the Detroit Three's leaders "failures." You said loans to them would be "wasted money." You said they should go bankrupt and "let the market work."

Why weren't you equally vocal when your state handed out hundreds of millions in tax breaks to Mercedes-Benz, Hyundai, Honda and others to open plants there? Why not "let the market work"? Or is it better for Alabama if the Detroit Three fold so that the foreign companies -- in your state -- can produce more?

Way to think of the nation first, senator.

And you, Sen. Kyl of Arizona. You told reporters: "There's no reason to throw money at a problem that's not going to get solved."

That's funny, coming from such an avid supporter of the Iraq war. You've been gung ho on that for years. So how could you just sit there when, according to the New York Times, an Iraqi former chief investigator told Congress that $13 billion in U.S. reconstruction funds "had been lost to fraud, embezzlement, theft and waste" by the Iraqi government?

That's 13 billion, senator. More than half of what the auto industry is asking for. Thirteen billion? Gone? Wasted?

Where was your "throwing money at a problem that's not going to get solved" speech then?

Watching over the bankers?

And the rest of you lawmakers. The ones who insist the auto companies show you a plan before you help them. You've already handed over $150 billion of our tax money to AIG. How come you never demanded a plan from it? How come when AIG blew through its first $85 billion, you quickly gave it more? The car companies may be losing money, but they can explain it: They're paying workers too much and selling cars for too little.

AIG lost hundred of billions in credit default swaps -- which no one can explain and which make nothing, produce nothing, employ no one and are essentially bets on failure.

And you don't demand a paragraph from it?

Look. Nobody is saying the auto business is healthy. Its unions need to adjust more. Its models and dealerships need to shrink. Its top executives have to downsize their own importance.

But this is a business that has been around for more than a century. And some of its problems are because of that, because people get used to certain wages, manufacturers get used to certain business models. It's easy to point to foreign carmakers with tax breaks, no union costs and a cleaner slate -- not to mention help from their home countries -- and say "be more like them."

But if you let us die, you let our national spine collapse. America can't be a country of lawyers and financial analysts. We have to manufacture. We need that infrastructure. We need those jobs. We need that security. Have you forgotten who built equipment during the world wars?

Besides, let's be honest. When it comes to blowing budgets, being grossly inefficient and wallowing in debt, who's better than Congress?

So who are you to lecture anyone on how to run a business?

Ask fair questions. Demand accountability. But knock it off with the holier than thou crap, OK? You got us into this mess with greed, a bad Fed policy and too little regulation. Don't kick our tires to make yourselves look better.

I say let the automakers sink or swim

How much of this bail out money will be stuffed in golden parachutes for the executives and in the UAWs corrupt leadership

I sure as hell can't afford to buy a new car



And most of the cars made today are about as exciting as white bread



I miss the Cars of the 50s, 60s, 70s and 80s


They should bring those back


Get rid of the minivans and SUVs; And pickups should be only driven by contractors and rednecks

You mean 50s, 60s, and 70s? The 80s had the worst cars ever made.

catbox_9 wrote:

You mean 50s, 60s, and 70s? The 80s had the worst cars ever made.

Early 80s had some nice cars

gs78 wrote:

I sure as hell can't afford to buy a new car



And most of the cars made today are about as exciting as white bread



I miss the Cars of the 50s, 60s, 70s and 80s


They should bring those back


Get rid of the minivans and SUVs; And pickups should be only driven by contractors and rednecks

y kan only rednecks drive pick up.. my whole familydrives chevy silverados 4x4's // we aint redneck

detroitwings82 wrote:

gs78 wrote:

I sure as hell can't afford to buy a new car



And most of the cars made today are about as exciting as white bread



I miss the Cars of the 50s, 60s, 70s and 80s


They should bring those back


Get rid of the minivans and SUVs; And pickups should be only driven by contractors and rednecks

y kan only rednecks drive pick up.. my whole familydrives chevy silverados 4x4's // we aint redneck

Because big ass trucks replaced big cars



To go back to Catbox's post


The still made some big ass cars in the Early 80s


The Coupe Deville



The Contiential



The El Dorado


Ponitac Bonneville


Chevy Caprice



They don't make one full size two door coupe anymore


And most sedans [ except for the Town Car, Grand Marquis and Crown Vic] are mid size cars


They can make big ass trucks that run on diesel or get 12 miles to the gallon

If I knew anything about fixing up cars or had a lot to buy a fixed up one; I get me an El Dorado like Boss Hogg had in the Dukes of Hazzard show


Or get me a convertible from the 50s or 60s

NA!!! If i had alot fo money to throw around i would go fix up a 1968 Barracuda , 1969 dodge charger, or a 1960's Nova! What ever i could get my hands on first... I would personally wont a barracuda like the one off 2Fast2Furious

gs78 wrote:

I say let the automakers sink or swim

How much of this bail out money will be stuffed in golden parachutes for the executives and in the UAWs corrupt leadership

Agreed. What ever happened to personal responsibility. You screw up and too bad. It pisses me off when I see these debt consolidation commercials...."I owed the IRS $100,000 but we settled for $10,000". What the hell is that? You but it/owe it then pay for it. My mom bought our house in 1985, it isn't paid for but she's never missed a payment....where's her bailout? Shouldn't her irresponsibility, or lack thereof, be rewarded?

Besides, other than one Lincoln and one Ford the other three cars we own are foreign

Wait a second...I don't sound like a very good Democrat now Umm.....legalize drugs! More gay marriage! More rehabilitation in lieu of prison! More big spending! Save the animals! Save the environment!

detroitwings82 wrote:

NA!!! If i had alot fo money to throw around i would go fix up a 1968 Barracuda , 1969 dodge charger, or a 1960's Nova! What ever i could get my hands on first... I would personally wont a barracuda like the one off 2Fast2Furious

Those cars are cool



Everything made today is crappy looking


I miss seeing chrome on cars



All that cheap plastic shit


Get in a fender bender

And it crushes like a tin can

Saturday, December 13, 2008
Big 3 rescue wins rivals' support
Foreign-based carmakers fear backlash collapse of Detroit's auto industry would have on supply chain.
Christine Tierney / The Detroit News

WASHINGTON -- They may be unrelenting rivals of Detroit's Big Three, but foreign-based automakers don't relish the prospect that one or more of Detroit's automakers might go under.

On the contrary, the risk that one of the U.S. car companies could collapse deeply worries Asian and German manufacturers with U.S. factories.

As the industry's outlook has deteriorated in recent months, executives at foreign car companies have said they want to see Detroit's cash-strapped automakers get through the crisis, noting that they all share the same network of suppliers.

"We're joined at the hip with our Detroit brethren in manufacturing," said Irv Miller, group vice president and chief spokesman at Toyota Motor Corp.'s U.S. sales subsidiary. Whatever the U.S. government proposes to keep the U.S. automakers afloat, "we support it," Miller said.

On Friday the Bush administration signaled that it would extend a financial lifeline to General Motors Corp. and Chrysler LLC after a bailout bill died Thursday night in the Senate, where it ran into fierce opposition from Republicans. Some of the bill's most vocal critics, such as Sen. Richard Shelby of Alabama and Sen. Bob Corker of Tennessee, represent southern states that have successfully courted investment from foreign automakers.

In the past few weeks, as senators from states with foreign transplants have grown more strident in their criticism of Detroit's top managers and the United Auto Workers union, executives from Japanese and German companies have tried to distance themselves from those sentiments.

Honda executives made it clear last month that they didn't share the views expressed by Rep. Mike Pence, R-Ind., who said during the opening of Honda Motor Co.'s new assembly plant in Greensburg, Ind., that he would rather see the U.S. automakers file for bankruptcy than receive taxpayer money.

Jeffrey Smith, assistant vice president for corporate affairs at American Honda, told reporters, "Honda supports measures that would maintain the short- and long-term viability and stability of the auto industry."

Like his colleagues at Toyota, Smith noted that all automakers that have U.S. production facilities are "deeply and closely integrated at the supply base."

Some executives at foreign automakers are being tactful to prevent a resurgence of the kind of protectionism and backlash that flared in the 1970s and 1980s. But those sentiments have subsided, particularly in regions where German automakers BMW AG and Daimler AG's Mercedes-Benz and the Japanese and Koreans have built factories.

Executives at the Japanese manufacturers have been surprised to hear lawmakers assert that their workers earn far less than workers employed by Detroit's automakers. One executive who spoke on condition of anonymity confirmed UAW President Ron Gettelfinger's remarks Friday that team members, or line workers, at Toyota's largest North American assembly plant in Georgetown, Ky., earned more than the average UAW worker.
According to Gettelfinger, a UAW worker earns wages of just over $28 an hour, on average, compared with $30.45 an hour for Georgetown's non-union workers. That includes profit-sharing bonuses that are likely to decline for the current year.

Wages at Nissan Motor Co. and Honda sites average between $25 and $29 an hour and tend to rise faster than pay at UAW plants.

Including benefits and other compensation, the gap widens, with UAW workers costing $55 an hour on average, compared with an hourly cost of around $45 at the transplants. But concessions made in the last UAW contract in 2007, including lower starting wages for new hires, are expected to close that gap by 2012.

In recent months, foreign automakers and parts suppliers have tried to work out contingency plans in the event of a collapse of one of Detroit's Big Three. But executives say they would not be able to shield themselves from the impact of an automaker's collapse because the number of distressed suppliers in North America already is in the hundreds.

Saturday, December 13, 2008
White House offers lifeline to automakers
Weekend talks to hammer out terms, amount
David Shepardson and Gordon Trowbridge / Detroit News Washington Bureau

WASHINGTON -- The Bush administration vowed Friday to prevent General Motors Corp. or Chrysler LLC from collapsing after the Senate blocked a $14 billion bailout, but determining the size and scope of a rescue will likely take days of intensive negotiations.

The White House and Treasury Department reversed course after weeks of opposing efforts to use remaining funds from the first $350 billion of the $700 billion Wall Street bailout to keep the two automakers from filing for bankruptcy.

Talks were held Friday among officials from Treasury, GM and Chrysler's parent company, Cerberus Capital Management LP, but no deal was reached. More talks were planned for today and Sunday by teleconference. GM's chief financial officer, Ray Young, is leading the talks for the automaker, in large measure because they focus on complex financial issues. A deal could come as early as Monday but it may take several more days.

President George W. Bush and Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson haven't decided how much of the $15 billion remaining in the Wall Street fund, known as the Troubled Assets Recovery Program, or TARP, they would use to help the automakers and what conditions they will demand.

The talks came as GM, underscoring its woes, announced another round of steep production cuts amid a weakening auto market. Treasury officials stepped in Friday with urgency to rescue GM and Chrysler after Congress fell short of a bailout agreement late Thursday.

"Because Congress failed to act, we will stand ready to prevent an imminent failure until Congress reconvenes and acts to address the long-term viability of the industry," Treasury Department spokeswoman Brookly McLaughlin said.

White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said "it would be irresponsible" to allow the automakers to fail amid the nation's economic troubles. In November, the nation shed 533,000 jobs -- the highest monthly drop in 34 years.

Granholm knocks Congress

Congress' failure to approve a rescue package brought fierce denunciations on Friday. Gov. Jennifer Granholm called the defeat "un-American."

"The clock is ticking," she said. "Automakers are drowning."

Rep. John Dingell, D-Dearborn, blasted the decision of most Senate Republicans to vote against the bill. "Last night, some Southern senators kicked American workers in the gut," Dingell said. "Senators from states where the international automakers do considerable business unpatriotically blocked a bill."

Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Ala., a vocal critic of Detroit automakers, said he would have voted the same way even if the Big Three owned five plants in his state. He predicted the White House would intervene.

"I don't think President Bush is going to let anybody fail," Shelby told CNBC. "He just wants to get out of town."

GM and Chrysler have said they could be forced into bankruptcy by early next year without federal aid, and executives warn neither company could survive it, largely because they believe consumers won't buy cars from a bankrupt automaker.

GM said it needs $4 billion in government loans by Dec. 31 and another $4 billion in January, as part of an $18 billion emergency request. Chrysler said it needs $4 billion in government loans to survive until March 31, part of a $7 billion request. Ford Motor Co. asked for a $9 billion stand-by line of credit to tap if the market deteriorates but does not plan to immediately seek emergency loans.

Late Friday, Standard & Poor's Corp. warned that in the absence of a GM or Chrysler bailout, "the risk of default by one or both of these companies over the next few months remains very high."

Both companies could tumble into bankruptcy in early January, S&P said. "We believe the several billion dollars in outlays expected during the first few days of January 2009 could use up a substantial portion of both companies' respective cash balances, unless U.S. government support of some kind is forthcoming or the suppliers defer these payments," S&P said. The credit rating agency also said at least 15 suppliers could also be at risk of collapse.

"In addition, we believe concerns about bankruptcies have added to the declines in GM's and Chrysler's sales and therefore heightened their cash use," S&P said.

Ford could also be forced to burn through cash if it had to support suppliers in the event of a Chrysler or GM bankruptcy, the agency said.

House bill is a template

The White House and Treasury Department are likely to demand conditions similar to the bailout deal reached between the Bush administration and congressional Democrats that was passed by the House on Wednesday. That would include concessions from the United Auto Workers and bondholders, a ban on bonuses for top executives and submission by March 31 of a long-term restructuring plan that will lead to the automakers' long-term viability.

The administration's announcement, made just minutes before Wall Street opened Friday, sought to reassure investors after the Senate rejected an auto bailout bill because of a partisan dispute over hourly wages of UAW members.

GM and Chrysler have hired bankruptcy advisers, and Chrysler met with key suppliers Friday.

The bailout effort died on a procedural vote. Democrats needed 60 votes to end debate, but 52 senators supported the effort -- including 10 Republicans -- while 35 voted against it.

The White House had been planning for this possibility for more than two weeks. On Dec. 5, The Detroit News reported that the White House held high-level discussions with Cabinet departments about how the administration could aid automakers in the event Congress could not agree on providing funding.

Talks aimed at reaching a compromise agreeable to balking Senate Republicans failed on the question of whether the UAW would be forced to make steep wage and benefit cuts as soon as the end of 2009. The UAW had agreed to cuts after its contract expires in 2011. The union also agreed to a reduction in what it would have been paid in cash to fund an employee retiree health care trust fund.

UAW President Ron Gettelfinger on Friday accused GOP senators who opposed the bailout of trying "pierce the heart" of unions and urged Bush to act quickly.

Sen. Carl Levin, D-Detroit, said he was optimistic that any White House offer to the companies would require conditions along the lines of the measure that passed the House earlier this week. But some Republicans in Congress said Friday they were hoping any aid came with much tougher conditions similar to those in the failed Senate compromise. Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez is also involved in the talks. President-elect Barack Obama's transition team was talking Friday with automakers and members of Michigan's congressional delegation.

"My hope is that the administration and the Congress will still find a way to give the industry the temporary assistance it needs while demanding the long-term restructuring that is absolutely required," Obama said.

GM welcomed Friday's developments. "We are encouraged by the White House's willingness to consider other options, including the TARP program, for immediate aid to the domestic auto industry," GM spokesman Greg Martin said.

Chrysler Chairman and CEO Robert Nardelli sent a message Friday morning to employees, saying the company was "pleased" with the White House announcement. He also asked workers to call or e-mail the White House asking the administration to act.

State buys cars to help

Granholm said she's doing her part to help the domestic automakers. She said she bought 300 shares of stock of a domestic auto stock for her three children for Christmas. "It's a great way to support the home team," she said, adding: "If you can get credit, buy an American car now."

The state of Michigan decided to advance order 1,600 cars for its 2009 fleet by the end of this year to boost sales of American cars. An order for 500 cars already has been made, state officials said.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said in a letter to the White House on Friday that the Bush administration "must now require, as a condition of receiving those taxpayer funds, the same tough accountability and shared sacrifice by all parties -- executives, unions, suppliers, creditors, dealers, bondholders and shareholders -- mandated in the bipartisan legislation passed by the House this week."

The Michigan congressional delegation sent a letter to Bush, Paulson and Federal Reserve Board Chairman Ben Bernanke urging them to act.

There is one potentially bright spot for the Big Three in the failed bailout in Congress. Lawmakers had planned to tap a $25 billion Energy Department retooling fund to give them immediate aid. But the companies had applied for more than $16 billion in loans from that fund for future advanced projects. Now, they may still win funding for those projects if the emergency aid comes from the TARP program. But no funds from the Energy Department program will be released until next year -- in part because automakers must rework their applications.

GM stock, which fell as low as $2.61 earlier in the day, closed down about 5 percent at $3.92 a share in heavy trading. Ford closed at $3.05, up 5.2 percent.

Detroit News Staff Writer Gary Heinlein contributed to this report. You can reach David Shepardson at (202) 662-8735 or dshepardson@detnews.com

Fuck Bush


He is as bad as Pelosi and the Liberals



Waste more money on corrupt union bosses, overpaid workers and executives


Let em sink or swim

Jim Bunning for President in 2012



And phooey on the Gibraltar Trade Center for canceling an apperance by Bunning at a card show because of how he voted


Bunch of Facists

gs78 wrote:

Fuck Bush

Now you're getting it!

catbox_9 wrote:

gs78 wrote:

Fuck Bush

Now you're getting it!

I lost all respect for Bush



It like he wants to do this shit so he can do something the majority of the people are in favor of [ saving the Big 3 with government money] before he leaves office


If I wanted to see the government give bailouts to the Big 3, I would have voted Democrat

He's just trying to save what legacy he has...of being the worst President ever! I surely did NOT vote for him....

laprimamirala wrote:

He's just trying to save what legacy he has...of being the worst President ever! I surely did NOT vote for him....

He will go down as the worst President if he helps float 15 billion down the Big 3 toilet

Fed's bank ruling buoys GMAC, GM
Dealers rejoice as bank status lets lender tap bailout funds

BY BRENT SNAVELY and JEWEL GOPWANI • FREE PRESS BUSINESS WRITERS • December 25, 2008

The Federal Reserve granted a request Wednesday from GMAC LLC to become a bank holding company, a designation that helps General Motors' lending arm avert a potential bankruptcy, significantly improves GM's chances of survival and provides an immediate sense of relief to auto dealers.

"I just got the best Christmas gift in the world," said Joe Serra, who owns 37 automotive franchises.

The Federal Reserve Board said it made the decision under "emergency conditions," and is requiring both of GMAC's owners -- GM and Cerberus Capital Management L.P. -- to give up control of the company.

GMAC's future has been viewed as a wild card in GM's restructuring plan. A bankruptcy by GMAC could have wiped out the main lender to GM dealers, potentially derailing a turnaround at the Detroit automaker.

The Federal Reserve's move offers GMAC a lifeline, opening the door to GMAC for several funding options to lend money to dealers and consumers during a time of frozen credit markets brought on by the meltdown of the nation's financial institutions.

"General Motors is pleased that GMAC has won bank approval," Steve Harris, GM's vice president of communications, said late Wednesday. "Over time, if this makes credit for GM customers and dealers more available, it is obviously a good thing for GM."

GMAC spokeswoman Gina Proia said Wednesday, "We're very pleased about the news. It's a significant positive step for the company and really marks a turning point in our history."

Becoming a bank makes GMAC eligible to tap the $700-billion Troubled Asset Relief Program. GMAC has applied separately to the U.S. Treasury for money and is awaiting approval. Congress passed the TARP in October in an effort to bail out the nation's financial institutions and unfreeze the credit markets.

In addition to applying for money from TARP and being able to accept deposits, as a bank GMAC also plans to apply for a program to sell bonds that are backed by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.

"It provides GMAC with what we think is the best long-term solution for us to support the automotive finance business both for consumers and dealers," Proia said.

GMAC, which lost $2.52 billion during the three months that ended Sept. 30, is in such bad financial shape that it is having difficulty funding auto loans to consumers as well as financing dealer inventory plans. In November, GMAC warned that Residential Capital LLC, its mortgage lending unit, could default on its loans by year's end.

Without approval to become a bank, analysts said GMAC faced a bankruptcy filing that would have cut off financing to the roughly 85% of GM's North American dealers with which it does business.

Most of GM's auto dealers rely on GMAC for "floor planning," an industry term that refers to a loan that allows dealers to buy vehicles from the manufacturer until they are purchased by consumers.

Serra said he got the news while in church on Christmas Eve. About 65% of Serra's dealerships are GM franchises. Several months ago, Serra, president of Serra Automotive, said he put his vehicle inventory financing out for bid to other banks.

"But with what was going on recently ...no other lenders were interested in taking all of my inventory," he said. "Without floor planning, you cannot conduct business."

Losing loans from GMAC could have snowballed into a steep sales decline for GM, which already has been pushed to the brink of insolvency by the financial meltdown, frozen credit markets and national recession.

Allowing GMAC to fail potentially would have undone progress GM could make with the $13.4 billion in loans it is getting from the federal government, announced by the Bush administration last week.

One of the biggest immediate consequences is that the plan requires Cerberus and GM to give up most of their ownership stakes in the financing arm.

Cerberus, which owns 51% of GMAC, would cut its ownership stake to as little as 33%, maintaining voting interest of as much as 14.9%. To cut its stake, Cerberus would distribute its stock in GMAC to its investors. GM, which owns 49% of GMAC, would cut its stake to less than 10% of GMAC.

The news was released after the market closed Wednesday. Shares of GMAC dropped 36 cents or 6.6% Wednesday to close at $5.11.

Contact BRENT SNAVELY at 313-222-6512 or bsnavely@freepress.com. The Associated Press contributed to this report.

That should really help, even if someone wanted to buy, GMAC was unable to provide the financing... now they will be able to.

Also, the dealers will be helped.

GoGetEmTigers wrote:

That should really help, even if someone wanted to buy, GMAC was unable to provide the financing... now they will be able to.

Also, the dealers will be helped.

They all multimillionaires [ car dealers]


But let them benefit from government money



Still waiting for my own bailout


Too bad I have the same chance of getting one as I do of winning Mega Millions or having sex with Britney Spears

Tuesday, January 20, 2009
Fiat and Chrysler sign alliance plan
Christine Tierney / The Detroit News

Fiat SpA of Italy and Chrysler LLC and its owner Cerberus Capital Management LP announced plans Tuesday to establish a global alliance.

The deal will help ensure the Auburn Hills automaker's viability by providing it with access to Fiat's range of fuel-efficient small car platforms and engines, the two companies said in a joint statement.

Fiat in turn would receive an initial 35 percent equity interest in Chrysler, but it is not planning to make a cash investment in Chrysler or commit to funding the U.S. automaker in the future.

"A Chrysler/Fiat partnership is a great fit as it creates the potential for a powerful, new global competitor, offering Chrysler a number of strategic benefits, including access to products that complement our current portfolio, a distribution network outside North America, and cost savings in design, engineering, manufacturing, purchasing and sales and marketing," Chrysler Chairman Bob Nardelli said in the statement.

Sergio Marchionne, the CEO of Fiat Group, said: "This initiative represents a key milestone in the rapidly changing landscape of the automotive sector and confirms Fiat and Chrysler commitment and determination to continue to play a significant role in this global process."

Under the terms of the alliance, Fiat's Fiat Auto and Chrysler -- two roughly similarly sized carmakers -- would be able to take advantage of each other's distribution and supplier networks.

Chrysler said the deal would bolster its ability to repay the U.S. government "by securing the long-term viability of Chrysler brands in the marketplace."

The proposed alliance would conform with all the terms and conditions entailed in the U.S. Treasury's loans to Chrysler, the companies said.

The Treasury has provided $4 billion in loans to Chrysler, which has requested another $3 billion.

The United Auto Workers union expressed its support for the alliance. "This is great news for the UAW Chrysler team and we look forward to supporting and working with them to ensure Chrysler's long term viability," said Ron Gettelfinger, president of the UAW.

The deal's completion hinges on due diligence and approvals from the U.S. Treasury and other regulatory authorities.

You can reach Christine Tierney at (313) 222-1463 or ctierney@detnews.com

I heard there was an Italian marriage in the works!

The Fiat 500 is one of the cars that we may see Fiat making with Chrysler.

See the info from Consumers Guide HERE.

Fiat used to be a joke here in the 1970's. My dad bought one used in 1974 to motor between Garden City and Eastern Mich. Univ. where he was working on his Masters 30 hours to get a hike in his teaching pay. That little spit and glue stick shift car got him about 50 mpg and gave me nightmares trying to learn how to drive a stick! But it was cheep good transport for what he needed.

Fiat SpA is now a great company and the Fiat 500 is classed a great car! See: Fiat 500: "Possibly the Best Small Car on the Planet"


It comes from a company that includes:

• Fiat
  
• Lancia
  
• Alfa Romeo
  
• Fiat Professional
  
• Abarth
  
• Maserati
  
• Ferrari
  

I don't trust foreign automakers


Chrysler was once owned by the Germans several years ago [ Daimler] and look at Chrysler now



Maybe the Italian Government can subsidize them both


But with Nobama in power

He will be spending tax money like a drunken sailor on leave


God help us all!

Quote :

Chrysler was once owned by the Germans several years ago [ Daimler] and look at Chrysler now

Daimler still owns a small portion of Chrysler.

gs78 wrote:

I don't trust foreign automakers

Most (all but 2) of our cars are foreign and they more than get the job done.

GoGetEmTigers wrote:

Quote :

Chrysler was once owned by the Germans several years ago [ Daimler] and look at Chrysler now

Daimler still owns a small portion of Chrysler.

And look at the dismal state Chrysler is in

catbox_9 wrote:

gs78 wrote:

I don't trust foreign automakers

Most (all but 2) of our cars are foreign and they more than get the job done.

Glad to hear that Catbox


But I still don't trust the head honchos overseas