Bailout Watch 442: Nardelli: $5 Billion By March 31 Or Else

Edward Niedermeyer
by Edward Niedermeyer
Edward Niedermeyer
Edward Niedermeyer

More by Edward Niedermeyer

Comments
Join the conversation
4 of 30 comments
  • Windswords Windswords on Mar 18, 2009

    CommanderFish: "To be fair, Nardelli was not there when Chrysler was producing the vehicles that are currently getting bad ratings. Those normally run 3 or so MY’s behind, which puts it back in DCX years." Steven Lang: "I keep on screaming to anyone who will hear me that the current team is NOT responsible for the Daimler-decontenting we see right now." hwyhobo: "What exactly has Nardelli done for Chrysler so far?" It's not just Nardelli but Cerberus and Press and LaSorda as a whole. Here's a quick list: Cerberus hired all new management (something we have been screaming at GM to do, to no avail). They have cut models and consolidated dealerships (something we have been screaming at GM to do, to no avail). They have cut production (capacity) and employees (costs) because of the unprecedented drop in auto sales (something we have been screaming at GM to uh, well, you get the point). They have improved interiors in several models and new models. The Challenger and Ram interiors are so much better than the penny pinching crap of the Dumbler era. They greenlighted the Challenger, which I believe would never have happened if Dumbler was in control. They explored alliances with other automakers; some failed to materialize (Nissan), some have started (VW) and some are being explored (FIAT). They didn't get into a stupid situation like GM did vis-a-vie FIAT. They have a program to develop practical, profitable electric cars (unlike GM's "moonshot" that will cost too much, arrive too late, and not make them any money). It looks like between the two of them (if they are still in business) that Chrysler's will be on the market first. They have improved reliability. Warranty claim rates are down 30 percent. The cars in Consumer Reports that were surveyed in the spring of 2008 were built in the fall of 2007, shortly after the transition from Daimler to Cerberus ownership. CR measurements are based on three years of reliability data for each model, so it will take a considerable amount of time for changes implemented after the Cerberus takeover to appear in full. As for Nardelli himself, he was the only one who said he would take $1 for a salary and the only one who said if saving Chrysler ment he would lose his job as CEO then so be it. Can you even imagine Ricky baby saying that? Cerberus has owned Chrysler for less than 2 years; they are changing direction away from the path Daimler was taking. In the auto industry you can't change direction in a few months, it takes years. Do you even know the plans for Chrysler, what new models are coming, what new technology, etc? Are you aware of the interior and other upgrades that have been made for 09? Or the new engines with much improved MPG that will be here shortly? Or do you just assume everything is the same as when Daimler controlled it. They have made mistakes (like humans are wont to do), they will make some more in the future. But they are not the the total cluster f#*k that GM mgt and the BOD are.

  • Bytor Bytor on Mar 18, 2009

    I am not going to argue with anyone who thinks the USA should fund Chrysler. It's your money do what you want. I am in Canada. What I will argue for is cutting our (Canadas) ties with this latest incarnation of Nigerian Scammers. Once they hook you on the first installment, the come back with an even bigger payment request, they play on the fact that you already sunk in money you don't want to lose. It's time to cut our losses and move on. If we bow to this latest multi-billion dollar ultimatum, there will only be another down the road. Cut our losses, take our lumps, then we can watch this play out down south, with no more stake in the game. And no I am not discounting the human cost. My own company is in Chap 11 right now and I could lose my job any day with no severance, nothing. The money is better spent on re-training etc. Time to write my MP and tell not to bow to the latest Chrysler ultimatum.

  • Mattstairs Mattstairs on Mar 18, 2009

    I watch at least a bit of "Squawk Box" on CNBC every morning. Generally, the three hosts are far more critical of the bailouts, especially for the Big 3. This AM they were much too eager to have Nardelli on and consequently played a lot of softball. Phil LeBeau is a lot like the sports reporter at your local paper or TV station. He values his "contacts" at the Big 3 too much to risk asking difficult questions or making critical comments and losing that access.

  • Wsn Wsn on Mar 18, 2009
    Bytor : March 18th, 2009 at 9:25 am I am in Canada. What I will argue for is cutting our (Canadas) ties with this latest incarnation of Nigerian Scammers. Once they hook you on the first installment, the come back with an even bigger payment request, they play on the fact that you already sunk in money you don’t want to lose. I am in Canada too. This morning CBC reported that Canadian auto sales in January was down by a staggering ... 4%! And they are asking for billions of bailouts. Should Canadian tax payers pay for the sluggish sales of Chrysler in the US market? If Canadian is 10 times larger (in population) than the US, OK, why not just save the little brother. But really, the US is 10 times larger than Canada, and the US itself has no clue as how to save those companies. Shall I blame the CAW thugs? Or the spineless politicians?
Next