Bailout Watch 448: Fiat Denies ChryCo Debt Assumption

Robert Farago
by Robert Farago

I think it’s important to realize that the Detroit bailout is no longer an ideological battle. At the beginning of this $40 b-b-b-billion boondoggle (and counting), Motown-fed politicians defended the bailout by screaming “jobs! jobs! jobs!” even though the automakers themselves were screaming no such thing (aware as they no doubt were that those jobs! jobs! jobs! were doomed! doomed! doomed!). Now, you hear very little regarding “saving the middle class.” In fact, the rhetoric claiming we need to shell out for the domestics because “we must protect America’s industrial base” has also gone away. Now, Detroit’s new New Deal rests on a green platform (i.e., EVs), and depends entirely on “viability.” In other words, getting our freaking money back. Only not.

Ladies and gentlemen, the auto bailout bullet train has left the station. Suppliers get $5B. ChryCo and GM get umpteen more billions. To not provide the money would be to turn our back on our “investment.” So now the bailout is about what it was always really about: the transfer of power. The Presidential Task Force on Autos (PTFOA) is like the TVA; the feds have wrested the reins of power over a huge chunk of the US auto industry from their mismanagers, and they ain’t letting go until someone somewhere forces them to.

So the news that ChryCo’s CEO claimed that Fiat had agreed to assume 35 percent of Chrysler’s debt— countered by Fiat’s no NSFW way— means nothing. It simply shows that either A) Bob Nardelli misspoke (Fiat gets 35 percent of Chrysler’s shares) or B) the CEO will do anything to keep sucking on the federal teat.

Silly man. Someone should tell Mr. Nardelli that the Detroit bailout is no longer about him or Chrysler per se. He’s nothing more than a political pawn. OK, a federal employee. So chillax, Bob. Chyrsler’s future is in someone else’s hands.


Robert Farago
Robert Farago

More by Robert Farago

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 7 comments
  • Carlos.negros Carlos.negros on Mar 20, 2009

    As the saying goes, the worst lies are built on the truth. Yes, FIAT is years ahead of Chrysler in the building of small cars. Yes, FIAT makes attractive products that have been successful in countries like Brazil, Argentina, Spain, France, Greece, and Italy. But what does Chrysler have that FIAT could possibly want? The UAW? Minivans? A terrible reputation? If FIAT has extra money they need to launder, why pick Chrysler?

  • Guyincognito Guyincognito on Mar 20, 2009

    Sounds plausible to me. FIAT will most assuredly assume 35% of Chryslers debt, in the form of a cash payment from US taxpayers to be paid back, eventually.

  • MaintenanceCosts Poorly packaged, oddly proportioned small CUV with an unrefined hybrid powertrain and a luxury-market price? Who wouldn't want it?
  • MaintenanceCosts Who knows whether it rides or handles acceptably or whether it chews up a set of tires in 5000 miles, but we definitely know it has a "mature stance."Sounds like JUST the kind of previous owner you'd want…
  • 28-Cars-Later Nissan will be very fortunate to not be in the Japanese equivalent of Chapter 11 reorganization over the next 36 months, "getting rolling" is a luxury (also, I see what you did there).
  • MaintenanceCosts RAM! RAM! RAM! ...... the child in the crosswalk that you can't see over the hood of this factory-lifted beast.
  • 3-On-The-Tree Yes all the Older Land Cruiser’s and samurai’s have gone up here as well. I’ve taken both vehicle ps on some pretty rough roads exploring old mine shafts etc. I bought mine right before I deployed back in 08 and got it for $4000 and also bought another that is non running for parts, got a complete engine, drive train. The mice love it unfortunately.
Next