Bailout Watch 323: Chrysler "Full Transparency" Worth More Than $4b

Edward Niedermeyer
by Edward Niedermeyer

Bloomberg reports today that despite receiving $4b in government aid, Chrysler refuses to open its books to the public which involuntarily bailed it out. It turns out that when Robert Nardelli pledged “full financial transparency” while begging the government to buy into his Pentastarred hell, he was really offering “partial financial transparency.” As in, ChryCo will share the numbers with the Treasury, but nobody else. The weekly status reports, biweekly cash statements and monthly certifications to the Treasury are required to demonstrate that Chrysler is complying with policies on expenses. But as Chrysler Spokesperson Lori McTavish puts it “we are not in a position to mirror publicly traded companies, as our investors remain private. However, the company is obligated to our private investors and lenders, and as such, keeps them apprised.” Earth to Chrysler: your major investor is the public. And we expect more than just a thank you card.

If it weren’t for $4b in tax dollars, there would be no more Chrysler. Hell, your other major “equity” holder, Daimler, recently had the decency to tell the public what we already knew: that their 20 percent stake in Chrysler was worth bupkis. So guess what? Cerberus can claim private ownership all it wants, but a public-money bailout means the public has a right to take a look in the Nardelli’s balance book of horror. If Cerberus or Nardelli can’t live up to the consequences of foisting their failed business on taxpayers, let alone their own promises of “full transparency,” they should probably just forget about the second check they’re going to ask for in January. And Treasury Secretary Paulson should make their submitted financial information public anyway.

Edward Niedermeyer
Edward Niedermeyer

More by Edward Niedermeyer

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 18 comments
  • TheRealAutoGuy TheRealAutoGuy on Jan 07, 2009

    I would humbly suggest that at least some of the vitriol on this matter be directed at the Giant Brains in Stuttgart who bought Chrysler, drained it of cash, and then pushed it to the curb to die. An appropriate follow-up would be to then chase the $700B thrown at Wall Street. Heck, however appropriate or inappropriate the TARP fund may be, the degree of transparency Chrysler has offered is orders of magnitude better than what we know of how Wall Street is spending American dollars.

  • Kurt. Kurt. on Jan 08, 2009

    @Ken Elias, I respectfully have to disagree...I agree, Chrysler is a private company and has no requirement to share it's books. What I don't agree with is the motive. Chrysler COULD appease the public by sharing financial information but it won't. The reason I believe is because where MB sucked out proprietary technology and spit out the company, Cherbus is sucking out cash and assets. When time comes for the Gov to collect its return, there will be nothing left but the employees. Oh, and its the US Governments $4b. It ceased beig mine when they took it from my wallet. I have never had a say in how they spend it.

  • Cprescott People do silly things to their cars.
  • Jeff This is a step in the right direction with the Murano gaining a 9 speed automatic. Nissan could go a little further and offer a compact pickup and offer hybrids. VoGhost--Nissan has  laid out a new plan to electrify 16 of the 30 vehicles it produces by 2026, with the rest using internal combustion instead. For those of us in North America, the company says it plans to release seven new vehicles in the US and Canada, although it’s not clear how many of those will be some type of EV.Nissan says the US is getting “e-POWER and plug-in hybrid models” — each of those uses a mix of electricity and fuel for power. At the moment, the only all-electric EVs Nissan is producing are the  Ariya SUV and the  perhaps endangered (or  maybe not) Leaf.In 2021, Nissan said it would  make 23 electrified vehicles by 2030, and that 15 of those would be fully electric, rather than some form of hybrid vehicle. It’s hard to say if any of this is a step forward from that plan, because yes, 16 is bigger than 15, but Nissan doesn’t explicitly say how many of those 16 are all-battery, or indeed if any of them are.  https://www.theverge.com/2024/3/25/24111963/nissan-ev-plan-2026-solid-state-batteries
  • Jkross22 Sure, but it depends on the price. All EVs cost too much and I'm talking about all costs. Depreciation, lack of public/available/reliable charging, concerns about repairability (H/K). Look at the battering the Mercedes and Ford EV's are taking on depreciation. As another site mentioned in the last few days, cars aren't supposed to depreciate by 40-50% in a year or 2.
  • Jkross22 Ford already has an affordable EV. 2 year old Mach-E's are extraordinarily affordable.
  • Lou_BC How does the lower case "armada" differ from the upper case "Armada"?
Next