By on May 4, 2009

Section 2.15 Viper. (a) Subject to Section 2.15(b) below, notwithstanding any provision of this Agreement to the contrary, (i) Seller may, at its option, sell Intellectual Property and Purchased Inventories that relate solely to Vehicle Production (as defined in the Transition Services Agreement) and are not necessary or useful in any other line of business (the “Viper Assets”) prior to the Closing Date in an arm’s-length transaction to a party other than Purchaser on terms and conditions reasonably acceptable to the Purchaser, provided that the right of the Seller to sell the Viper Assets shall terminate on June 8, 2009 if no binding written agreement to purchase the Viper Assets has been executed and delivered by a bona fide purchaser at such time, and (ii) in connection with any such sale, Seller and Purchaser, as applicable, shall grant to the purchaser of the Viper Assets on terms and conditions reasonably acceptable to the Purchaser a non-exclusive license of other Intellectual Property of the Seller necessary for Vehicle Production as currently conducted.

The Purchaser shall at the request of the Seller work in good faith to facilitate such sale. If the sale of the Viper Assets is consummated prior the Closing Date, the Seller shall receive in trust for, segregate and convey to the Purchaser on the Closing Date all right, title and interest in the proceeds of such sale, which proceeds shall constitute Purchased Assets for all purposes of this Agreement. If any commitment to purchase the Viper Assets is made prior to the Closing Date, but not consummated, the Purchased Assets shall include Seller’s right, title and interest in the Viper Assets and in any agreement evidencing such commitment and any related or ancillary agreements entered into in connection therewith.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

22 Comments on “ChyrCo Court Docs: Dodge Viper Part of “Bad” Chrysler...”

  • avatar

    So does that mean my friend’s purchase of three Vipers was a good thing?

  • avatar

    “Bad” or “other?” We’re lacking a bit of context, but this language basically says that Chrysler gets to flog Viper to any interested third parties during the sorting-out of “bad” and “good” Chrysler, and then turn over the sale proceeds to “good” Chrysler.

    And if a third-party sale is not made? That’s the part we’re missing, but I get the feeling that “good” Chrysler would actually keep it.

  • avatar

    “Bad” in the George Thorogood sense of the word.

  • avatar

    They well sell Viper to Fiat then Fiat-Chrysler form its a Dodge Viper again….since the Viper line was for sale a while ago and obviously no takers…so ,I stand by my theory…Anyway’s The Viper is a part of “Good Chrysler” in my books.

  • avatar

    Paypal + Donations = TTAC-takes-over-the-Viper-program

  • avatar

    Of course the Viper is part of Bad Chrysler. If Good Chrysler had any products as well-built, competitive and desirable as the Viper, they wouldn’t have found the money tree.

  • avatar

    I actually think the Viper could be a good fit for Ford. Give them something on the high end to compete with ZR1. Though I doubt they’re looking to take it on.

  • avatar
    Robert Schwartz

    George Thorogood? 20 years too late.

    “Leader of the Pack” by the Shangri-Las.

    Good bad, not evil.

  • avatar

    My reasoning in calling Viper part of bad Chrysler is that if Fiat wanted it, as in wanted it at all, they wouldn’t be trying to shop it around. They’d just buy it. Which puts Viper in a bit of an odd place; Fiat doesn’t really want it, but it still thinks they might be able to sell it to someone.

  • avatar

    Which puts Viper in a bit of an odd place; Fiat doesn’t really want it, but it still thinks they might be able to sell it to someone.

    Fiat isn’t particularly serious about selling it, otherwise there wouldn’t be a June 8 deadline. Not quite five weeks to get her done.

    Sounds like a ploy against the bondholders: Hey, Bondholders, we shopped it and had no takers, nobody wants that thing…and you’re trying to value it for THAT much?

    The bondholders are going to argue for value that doesn’t exist. This whole thing will end up being about one core issue: the price.

  • avatar

    Halo Car:

    The car dad wishes he could buy instead of the minivan he has to buy.

    The mere existence of this car is an advertisement (see “Corvette”).

    The Halo Car makes the rest of line seem sporty by association if only to show “yes we can” on a corporate level.

    No Halo Car ????

  • avatar

    The Halo Car makes the rest of line seem sporty by association if only to show “yes we can” on a corporate level.

    Toyota’s halo car is the Prius. Important point, that.

  • avatar

    Naw, Toyota’s halo car is the Lexus LS.

  • avatar
    Drudge Potato Al

    It needs to be mentioned that Dodge always had planned to have 2010 be the last year of production for the Viper. I’ve got a buddy who owns a ’97 Viper and he told me this when it was discussed last winter that the Viper’s days may be numbered.

    A fantastic car but it has been around for quite a while.

  • avatar
    Billy Bobb 2

    That was one tragic wreck; Rt 130 in North Brunswick, NJ.

    Two cops rent a Viper on their lunch hour; I shit you not.

    The killed officer in the passenger seat TAUGHT DRIVER SAFETY.

    The moron “driving” wishes he was dead.

  • avatar

    If true, that’s very poor taste, using a fatal accident shot as an analogy for Chrysler’s financial dealings.

  • avatar

    I’ll give you 10 dollars and some pocket lint.

  • avatar

    The picture of the wrecked viper with the Jersey tags works on so many levels:

    It demonstrates:

    1) The current condition of ChryCo.

    2) The cowboy mentality of your typical Jersey cop (all of them hired through nepotism and cronyism)

    3) The condition of New Jersey’s fiscal health.

    Like they say, a picture is worth a thousand words.

  • avatar
    mad scientist

    The wrecked car is at least worth something (scrap metal?)

    Can’t say the same for New Jersey.

  • avatar

    you have to ask yourself the relevance in 2009 of a two seat rocket sled with an 8.0 litre motor that has remained relatively unchanged for the last decade

    is it for people who find the Z06/ZR1 Corvettes too pedestrian?

    i like fast cars but i can see how the business case for the Viper isn’t too sound

  • avatar

    Are you kidding me? As Dewey Cox’s father would say, the wrong kid died!

    Keep the Viper operation, merge it with Ferrari. Problem solved!

  • avatar

    Only a handful of Vipers are sold each year, far fewer than any other manufacturer’s “halo car”. As a result, Viper production was slated to be discontinued in 2010 anyway, even before Chrysler was bought by Cerberus. Sound and fury, signifying nothing.

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • CKNSLS Sierra SLT: theflyersfan Personally I would never finance a vehicle for 84 months, but transaction prices...
  • ajla: Like if the C8 Z06 was a $90K version of this, would it be so bad? Q&t
  • ajla: “sports car/muscle car hybrid” I think he means something like “grand touring” car but...
  • dal20402: Looks like the LFX is pretty susceptible, but not too many bad things happen as a result. The LGX is a lot...
  • mcs: “I still think that Corvette is supposed to be a sports car/muscle car hybrid, and that mid engine doesn’t...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Corey Lewis
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber