Oh. So. Predictable -- Both what is happening, and how it is being "covered."
Chrysler is barely out of bankruptcy, and there is already concern as to whether the money Uncle Sam, (i.e., U.S. taxpayers) funneled into the company -- while in the process of ripping off and intimidating its secured creditors, capriciously terminating plants and dealers, and running roughshod over long-held notions of fiduciary duty -- will be enough.
Beyond that, how many people know that the magical technology its new owner Fiat, which put no money of its own into the deal, is "more than a year away" from making its way to Chrysler?
"Somehow," the Associated Press's Obamacized news prioritizers decided that the info nuggets contained in the previous two paragraphs should be relegated to the final paragraphs of an unbylined report (also saved at host) this afternoon. The report, including its headline ("Chrysler names remaining directors to new board"), appeared to be merely a droll recitation concerning certain Board members. Only readers getting to the last three of the report's eight paragraphs would have any idea that Chrysler's situation is already a cause for renewed concern about its viability.
Readers here can make what they will of the Board's make-up, but, as noted, the real beef in the AP story is in those final paragraphs (bolds are mine):
..... Chrysler emerged from bankruptcy protection after just 42 days, cleansed of much of its debt and labor costs. But with sales down 46 percent from the first half of last year - a year in which Chrysler lost $8 billion - the company faces a huge challenge to make money again under its new Italian owner.
Fiat, which has taken over running Chrysler, will provide badly needed small-car and small-displacement engine technology, but that's more than a year away.
Chrysler's poor June performance also casts doubt on whether the U.S. government's $7 billion allocation will be enough to get the automaker through the U.S. sales slump, which is projected to last into next year. The government has said it stress-tested the $7 billion figure and determined that it is all Chrysler will need to make it until Fiat products arrive and Marchionne can turn the company around.
At the tail-end of its effort to keep Chrysler's emergence from bankruptcy intact, government lawyers shrieked that the company was losing $100 million "every day its plants are closed," and that the courts had to set bothersome concerns like centuries of contract law and the U.S. Constitution aside because of the dire situation they had contrived. Assuming that the government's $100 mil/day claim was a cash burn rate that won't change, the company will go through its $7 billion "allocation" in less than 2-1/2 months. Even under a supposedly lower cost structure implying a smaller burn rate, it's hard to see how the company gets very far into next year -- let alone to the "well over a year from now" arrival of Fiat's supposed magic, when Marchionne finally starts "turn(ing) the company around" (though he is on the Board, will he just let it sit there and rot in the meantime?) -- while it sells over 60% fewer vehicles than it did just two years ago.
The Obama administration can talk about "stress tests" all it wants, but with an economy heading towards 10% or worse unemployment and a large portion of American consumers clearly shunning the bailed-out pair of Chrysler and General Motors, it looks more than a little likely that Chrysler will come begging for more taxpayer money in some form yet again, or yet again threaten to grind to a halt.
Oh. So. Predictable.
Exit question 1: Will a post-bankruptcy GM be Chrysler writ much larger?
Exit question 2: What are the chances taxpayers are going to get to see meaningful and timely financial statements from either of their new "investments"?
Smart-aleck question: How much more will Chrysler burn through every day once its plants reopen?
Cross-posted at BizzyBlog.com.
—Tom Blumer is president of a training and development company in Mason, Ohio, and is a contributing editor to NewsBusters




















Editor at Large
Comments Policy
→ Go FORD!
July 5, 2009 - 23:29 ET by Cool ArrowCan a conservative really sign on the dotted line and buy a GM or Chrysler product?
OK, I know most of us held our noses and voted for McCain, but look where that got us?
Fool me twice?
Go Ford indeed...that is
July 5, 2009 - 23:38 ET by bigtimerGo Ford indeed...that is exactly what my husband has said....many, many times.
Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart
Exit Question 3:
July 5, 2009 - 23:35 ET by BlondeWhat the hell is this magical new technology Fiat is going to use to resurrect Chrysler's corpse?
The only thing I can possibly think of that Fiat might offer would be a fabulous new lasagna recipe.
Oh how I am going to love seeing this albatross hanging around Barry Obama's neck.
Que'lle disaster.
I hope he fails, too.
There won't be any
July 5, 2009 - 23:41 ET by bigtimerThere won't be any albatross hanging around O's neck...
Msm will ensure that.
Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart
Bloody hell
July 5, 2009 - 23:47 ET by BlondeYou stalking me again?
I hope he fails, too.
You have mental problems
July 5, 2009 - 23:58 ET by bigtimerYou have mental problems B...
I was replying to the post of yours and what the msm will do...nothing more, nothing less.
Your arrogance and wanting to fight all the time is pathetic.
Put your drinks down.
Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart
Oh my
July 6, 2009 - 00:01 ET by BlondeThe Hope Diamond thinks she's a pshrink.
I hope he fails, too.
Magical New Technology?
July 6, 2009 - 02:11 ET by sic721If they say so. Check ou the 'magical' Fiat 500 diesel, powered by a 4-cylinder 75 horsepower engine. That's right. 75 horsepower. You too can lose speed going up hills in this: link
As for Fiat's 'magical' gas engines,
"The first world-wide application of the Multiair technology will be the Fire 1400cc 16V Naturally Aspirated and Turbocharged engines."
1400cc or 1.4 liter engine. If you remember the Chevrolet Chevette, it came with a 1.6 liter(1600cc) engine and were pretty much dogs.
The second application is a new Small Gasoline Engine (SGE - 900cc Twin-cylinder) where cylinder head design has been specifically optimized for the Multiair actuator integration. link
Now this, this is 'magical'. 900cc or .9 liter engine. Shoot, the old Chevy Sprint(now Geo Metro) had a 1.0 liter(1000cc) 3-cylinder in it. Peppy. That's the word. Granted, gas mileage is great, but if you're like me and love driving a small-block chevy, they suck.
And btw, no word on any hybrids in the U.S. yet. link
And check out the gallery here for all the awesome, new, 'magical' models coming soon. Very nice if you're 5'3" or under.
"A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within."-Cicero
Ahhh....THAT magical technology
July 6, 2009 - 12:11 ET by BlondeGot it, thanks.
So this magical new technology, if I'm following, is engines smaller than a Chevette? Hmmm....sounds like a great solution, it didn't work too well the first time, but it will be lots better this time around (thanks to the omniscient Obama), even less power and smaller, too. And italian.
I had to laugh at your link with the magical models, I can't imagine trying get into (or more importantly out of, with a short skirt) one of those golf carts.
I hope he fails, too.
sic721, I noticed fiat has a "Palio Weekend"
July 6, 2009 - 12:33 ET by upcountrywaterDoes that mean that we can only drive it on the weekends?
Even and odd driving days, is so passe'.
Reagan VS Liberalism
upc....funny you should mention that
July 6, 2009 - 13:13 ET by BlondeDuring our recent trip to Costa Rica, we learned that the locals are not allowed to drive in the capital of San Jose, one day a week, depending on the number that begins the sequence on their license plates.
Traffic abatement. Gosh, I sure hope the democrats don't read this post.
I hope he fails, too.
We need to keep harping
July 6, 2009 - 01:16 ET by PewahWe need to keep harping after the real purpose of Obama's bailout of these poorly run companies. He has repaid a political debt to the unions and has put us, our children, and our children's children on the hook for the ENORMOUS tab. This all could have been avoided had GM and DCX been allowed to go into bankruptcy, the best parts sold off to private investors, and the unions told to go to hell.
What looked like a great idea to a new, socialist president, ready to begin molding his vision of a state-guided industrial base, is going to be an absolute millstone around his neck in 2012.
At this point, even if Obama finally has to admit that it was wrong to bail those steaming piles in the first place, he's already spent BILLIONS on his misguided idea.
Pewah... Exactly
July 6, 2009 - 01:23 ET by bigtimerPewah...
Exactly right....we need the repubs to mention this early and often...
Especially with '10 coming sooner that you think sometimes....politically speaking that is in regards to this issue.
Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart
Requiem
July 6, 2009 - 03:17 ET by FranksamChrysler and GM have made some great motors and great memories in my lifetime. I still have a GMC pick-up with 195,000 miles on a 350 cid V-8 that won't quit. I drove the bejusus out of my dad's Cadillacs that had engines as big as a small apartment, and backseats in which one could fall in love.
The 426 hemi cars were scary for their lack of handling and stopping capability, other than against a tree, but they did move the metal down the road. The 'hemi under glass' Barracuda wasn't much more than a motor with wheels, in my recollection.
Please join me in a moment of silence for the passing of an American era, and then let's join in song.
As I was motivatin' over the hill
I saw Mabellene in a Coup de Ville
A Cadillac arollin' on the open road
Nothin' will outrun my V8 Ford
The Cadillac doin' about ninety-five
She's bumper to bumper, rollin' side by side
Maybellene -Chuck Berry
Re Requiem
July 6, 2009 - 09:01 ET by slickwillie2001I often wonder about the influence of cars on our generation. We grew up around, in and under cars. It was the golden age of automobiles and it lasted three or four generations. This was when you could do your own work on cars without a garage full of electronics and some secret codes that cost more than the car. Cars allowed us, and forced us to learn. You could stick something on your car without worrying if it was government-approved. Now you open the hood of a car and even for someone like me there are boxes and tubes and hoses and things that I can't identify. There's a big plastic hood under the first hood. The Service Manuals are as big as ever but they tell you very little that's useful.
On my last trip to Home Depot I noticed their schedule of courses for homeowners. One was called 'Basic Tools'; it showed you how to use a hammer and a screwdriver and a couple of other things. This latest generation of kids can't do anything with their hands. Worthwhile school shop classes are mostly a thing of the past. Kids can bang on a keyboard all day but they can't change the oil on their car.
How many of our great innovators and entrepreneurs got interested in how things work by tinkering with an old car? Since the 60's, government has been sticking their nose into our cars; owning the companies is just another increment. I see the day coming when the hood of your car will be locked and only a government-licensed technician will be able to open it. We are becoming a helpless nation.
Fiats
July 6, 2009 - 08:27 ET by trhugI can see that many , many people have never owned a Fiat vehicle. In my opinion, the Fiat is barely better than walking. My uncle and my brother-in-law both owned Fiats. Neither learned to curse efficiently until ownership of a FIAT.
Fiat, which has taken over running Chrysler
July 6, 2009 - 09:23 ET by nolotrippen"Fiat, which has taken over running Chrysler, will provide badly needed small-car and small-displacement engine technology"
Huh? Does the person writing this have any knowledge of automotive technology or did he just read a press release?
Chyrsler is a poster child for a company with great products (there, I said it) that were selling well (maybe it's just Los Angeles and Simi, but the roads were lousy with Dodges and Chyrslers) that was destroyed by weak management and strong unions.
But nothing destroys quite like government intervention.
All you need to know about Fiat
July 6, 2009 - 09:38 ET by FranksamFix It Again Tony
The Truth reveled
July 6, 2009 - 10:04 ET by CobraMan"Chrysler's poor June performance also casts doubt on whether the U.S.
government's $7 billion allocation will be enough to get the automaker
through the U.S. sales slump"
So, the Truth is finally reveled. Chrysler didn't receive a loan, they didn't receive a recoverable investment through the purchase of stocks by the federal government, they received an "allocation" of 7 billion dollars that will NEVER be repaid.
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.
The US Constitution
Unless you're a fetus.
The US Supreme Court
This is going to be easy
July 6, 2009 - 16:06 ET by Lancasters Saved UsThis is going to be easy Pickins for Toyota and Honda. Want small, buy a Fit, want bigger, buy a Civic, want semi comfy, buy an Accord. They are not going to sit still waiting for the Fiat saviour. I doubt Fiat does very much cold weather testing. These things will rust as fast as they used to when they were last available. My picks for some degree of success. Opel under Frank Stronach (With Rusky backing), Saturn under Roger Penske. I Don't feel too good about the rest of GM and Fiatsco.
The chances taxpayers see
July 6, 2009 - 10:39 ET by ConservativeMissourianThe chances taxpayers see meaningful and timely financial statements from new “investments” are possible. But it is a long time coming. Like mentioned above, it is going to be a long time before Fiat makes its way to Chrysler. After Fiat is in 'charge' there, it will be a while longer before they have any able to have any beneficial impact on Chrysler, from reevaluating/restructuring/etc.
Re reporting
July 6, 2009 - 12:08 ET by slickwillie2001Exactly. The level of transparency and responsible financial reporting is far higher in private companies than in government organizations. We saw that in Fannie and Freddie, even though they made an attempt to report using the standards that a private company would. Imagine getting an annual report with the detail required of a private company, from the Medicare system. Never going to happen. We won't have an honest accounting of Government Motors and Chrysler for many years after the fact, if ever.