Nissan – Renault – Chrysler Merger?
We’ve been largely ignoring this possibility because, well, the GM – Chrysler merger thing is a much more appealing possibility, in that “how nuts do you have to be to be a top executive for a domestic car company” kinda way. But now that it’s OK to write news reports based entirely on anonymous sources, well, why not Chrysler – Nissan? I mean, Chrysler – Nissan – Renault? I mean, Carlos “The Jackal” Ghosn? And The Detroit News is there! “The Renault-Nissan alliance is proposing to acquire around 20 percent of Chrysler LLC and bring the Auburn Hills automaker into the French-Japanese automotive partnership, according to sources familiar with the situation… Sources familiar with the discussions said Carlos Ghosn, CEO of both Renault SA and Nissan Motor Co., sent a proposal in recent days that included revisions to a draft agreement prepared by Cerberus… The sources said Tokyo-based Nissan would acquire the stake because it has cash on hand, whereas Renault now has debts of more than $5 billion.” So, which company does Cerberus favor to gut Chrysler like a fish? Go ahead and jump.
“But another source close to the talks has told The Detroit News that Cerberus founder and CEO Stephen Feinberg favors a deal with GM, viewing it as the best solution for the embattled U.S. auto industry.” Huh? Feinbger is worried about the U.S. auto industry? Sure, and I’m concerned about an asteroid strike.
Anyway, the DetN’s source’s speculation raises an important question: would the Renault – Nissan – Chrysler deal be better for the American auto industry? The reporters certainly seem to think so. “By contrast, Detroit’s smallest automaker would remain largely intact as a partner in the Renault-Nissan alliance. It would participate in the joint purchasing, vehicle platform development and other programs, slashing its costs. But it would have its own management and retain its brands. There is little overlap among Renault, Nissan and Chrysler brands in most of the world.” Sure, makes sense to me. Full Chrysler Suicide Watch later today.
Lynn Ellsworth on Oct 22, 2008In the future I see cars sold on Amazon.com. I don’t. Cars are too expensive to sell themselves. Most customers need to be convinced to take the plunge and sign the papers. Sears tried to sell cars through its catalog and failed. The internet is a big improvement over a one-sided catalog. Many of the first companies that built cars and computers failed but others kept trying and succeeded. Hopefully many have realized that they were convinced to buy more car and more loan than they should have and will be more realistic in the future. I still feel that dealers are obsolete, expensive, a clumsy way to sell, and potentially annoying to the final customer. We should keep our minds open and not assume the way things were done in the past will continue.
Hughie522 on Oct 22, 2008
Further proof that, "Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it." As with the U.S. federal government bailing out Chrysler before, another French carmaker (Peugeot) bought Chrysler Europe for $1 in the 1980s, resurrected Talbot, was unable to sell the damn thing and then did a, "Let's call the whole thing off." *Sigh*
Latest Car ReviewsRead more
Latest Product ReviewsRead more
- DenverMike Pininfarina I know it's not related to this, I just like saying it.
- Matt Posky I don't understand the appeal of fake meat and this seems to operate under a similar premise: You don't want the V8 because someone says it's bad for you. But you can have something designed to mimic the experience because that's what your body actually wants. The styling is cool I guess. But I don't understand why EVs don't just lean into what they are. Companies can make them produce any wooshing or humming noises they want. Buiding an entire system to help you pretend it still has a combustion engine seems a little lame.
- DenverMike I'm sure it would have a volume control. It's nice to sneak into my neighborhood at 2am quietly. Or creep out, 4am. I don't get much sleep OK, but I always keep my V8 exhaust stock, as much as I love the sound of others loud. My stereo would make it pointless anyway.
- FreedMike I’d love to see more tracks, or off-road parks if that’s your jam. But for those of us who’d love to take part in this kind of thing, practicality is the limiting factor. Racing has always been expensive, and most people don’t want to do it with their daily drivers - I’d love to see what my GLI would do on a track, but not at the cost of voiding my warranty, or potentially wrapping up the car (which I’m pretty sure would put me on State Farm’s Keith Moon-trashing-the-Holiday Inn list). As a practical matter, you have to have a vehicle that is intended to be used for racing, and the ability to fix it; most folks don’t have that kind of money or skill set.
- Dukeisduke Oh, so it *is* a hatchback. Last night, I watched the replay of the reveal with Tim Kuniskis presenting the car, on Instagram. A "fly-through" of the car on the pre-rollout video made it look like they were going through an open hatch, so it had me wondering. The car attracted a lot of negative comments on IG, on feeds of guys who were there live.This is probably the least "electric car" electric car.