  Supersport Member Username: Supersport Post Number: 11296 Registered: 10-2003 |
This just seems unbelievable, for something of this size to be sold via auction. Starting price? $14 billion! http://www.clickondetroit.com/ news/11054898/detail.html | ||
Yelloweyes Member Username: Yelloweyes Post Number: 75 Registered: 02-2007 |
It seems changes are happening very fast for Chrysler. | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 619 Registered: 06-2006 |
$14 billion+ sale and yet it's still only worth 1 feedback point | ||
Scottr Member Username: Scottr Post Number: 294 Registered: 07-2006 |
no kidding. wednesday: looking at options later that day: gm purchase rumor thursday: gm's working on a large suv deal friday: gm purchase rumors start to hit mainstream news sunday: hyundai rumors begin, end monday: chrysler up for auction wondering what tomorrow will bring. don't think its good for michigan, regardless. | ||
Walterwaves Member Username: Walterwaves Post Number: 99 Registered: 01-2007 |
wow, just wow | ||
Detroitplanner Member Username: Detroitplanner Post Number: 994 Registered: 04-2006 |
I saw an ad for chrysler on Ebay! | ||
Jerome81 Member Username: Jerome81 Post Number: 1307 Registered: 11-2003 |
What? You can't auction it piece by piece, unless they want to dissolve the company..... I had heard it may go for $5 billion. At $14 billion I'm wondering who the takers might be. Can't really imagine many. So at this pace, by the end of next week Chrysler should no longer exist, right? | ||
Charlottepaul Member Username: Charlottepaul Post Number: 533 Registered: 10-2006 |
Sell it the highest bidder. It's what you do with stuff that not too many people want and you don't either... | ||
Jiminnm Member Username: Jiminnm Post Number: 1187 Registered: 02-2005 |
Does this mean Chrysler is bleeding more dollars than most thought? DCX paid $36-38 billion when it acquired Chrysler (despite the argument that it was a 'merger of equals'). | ||
Charlottepaul Member Username: Charlottepaul Post Number: 535 Registered: 10-2006 |
Guess we will find out at the end of the auction how much it is worth... | ||
Burnsie Member Username: Burnsie Post Number: 859 Registered: 11-2003 |
I never understood people thinking that "merger" meant Chrysler would retain more independence than if it was "taken over." EVERY merger is a takeover! When two companies combine, one always buys the other and subsumes it to one degree or another. Not for a minute did I ever buy that PR spiel about a "merger of equals." | ||
Detroitplanner Member Username: Detroitplanner Post Number: 995 Registered: 04-2006 |
My guess is that the company does not really want it spun off their platforms are linked together now, and the new owners will have all of mercedes secrets. This is probably just a ploy to placate the germans that are dumping their stock. Funny thing was it was not long ago when the Chrylser operations was the only one keeping profits up. These things cycle. It is actually good for DCX to have their fingers in many pies. | ||
1953 Member Username: 1953 Post Number: 1307 Registered: 12-2004 |
I offer $10! d | ||
Sstashmoo Member Username: Sstashmoo Post Number: 18 Registered: 02-2007 |
It's not good news, but it's not the end of the world neither. Time for people around Detroit to start remaking themselves and adjust their fields accordingly. I have a small bizz and used to be 100% automotive. The money was good, but the roller coaster and BS that came along with it was a joke. Last summer I segway'd into another area of business. Assessed the capabilities of my small shop and applied them in a totally different industry. Short term, the auto's downturn is going to put the squeeze on Detroit. Long term, Detroit will survive with some different industries, pay scales and prices adjusted accordingly. The manufacturing is in place here, the labor force is here. The expertise is here. Somebody, whomever will be doing something here. Wether it be automotive or whatever products. Detroit will pull through this. Just my Opinion.. | ||
Burnsie Member Username: Burnsie Post Number: 860 Registered: 11-2003 |
"the new owners will have all of mercedes secrets." I really doubt DaimlerChrysler would let that happen. This would be an auction for the Chrysler Group, not Mercedes. An auction could get rid of all the Chrysler factories and current models. But DaimlerChrysler would probably not auction all its under-wraps Chrysler product plans and trade secrets-- it would simply shift them over to the German side and hold onto them. | ||
Scottr Member Username: Scottr Post Number: 296 Registered: 07-2006 |
Actually, very little is integrated between Daimler and Chrysler, which is one of the reasons they've suffered so badly. The savings expected were never realized, simply because the Germans were afraid it would water down the Mercedes brand, which is BS, cause Mercedes' quality was never impressive anyways. Luxury != quality. In any case, it's the reason a split is still a relatively simple proposition. About the only thing that ever did cross the divide was the Crossfire, which I believe is based on the previous generation SLK (i could be wrong on the model). maybe a few other things crossed over, but if anything, it was 'second best' or older stuff. I agree completely with your second paragraph - I've thought the same thing. First Mercedes carried Chrysler, then it flip flopped to Mercedes bleeding cash and Chrysler saved the company. now its switched once more. I suspect in a few years, Mercedes is gonna lose a fortune, but they'll have no one to save the day. they'll blame it on Chrysler still though, for taking Daimler's talent with them. they never gave Chrysler credit for anything. | ||
Danny Member Username: Danny Post Number: 5528 Registered: 02-2004 |
Chrysler is selling their World HQ's. This is truly the end of Chrysler. One of the Big Three is dying! | ||
Ccbatson Member Username: Ccbatson Post Number: 114 Registered: 11-2006 |
It hasn't been a part of the big 3 since it was acquired by Mercedes. No more than Jaguar is now part of the big 3 since Ford got them. Is this Ebay thing for real and serious? It can't be, can it? | ||
Johnnny5 Member Username: Johnnny5 Post Number: 436 Registered: 06-2005 |
No more news about this? I can't even find it mentioned on the local news pages. Was is just a rumor? (Message edited by Johnnny5 on February 20, 2007) | ||
Detroitplanner Member Username: Detroitplanner Post Number: 999 Registered: 04-2006 |
I've seen a Mercedes Pacifica on the road, there has to be more integration than just the Crossfire! If not, these folks are fools. I'm going to put that on my list of stuff to google. | ||
Supersport Member Username: Supersport Post Number: 11300 Registered: 10-2003 |
It was my understanding that the whole Magnum/300/Charger platform was built or based upon Mercedes architecture. | ||
Scottr Member Username: Scottr Post Number: 300 Registered: 07-2006 |
dp, you probably saw an m-class, mercedes crossover. i don't think it's based on it, although they have a similar appearance, like most crossovers. ss, you are somewhat right, the lx platform does have some components from various mercedes models. it's not enough to stop a split from happening though. i admit i was probably wrong on the 'second-best or older' part, but it's still very little integration, not nearly the amount that would have kept the company together. | ||
Ndavies Member Username: Ndavies Post Number: 2452 Registered: 10-2003 |
SS, You've been misinformed. There are only a handful of parts from the Mercedes parts bin on the 300. Mostly axel and suspension parts. Designs that Mercedes considered obsolete when they sold them to Chrysler. Chrysler is paying Mercedes a per vehicle charge for the use of those part designs. Everything else is Chrysler or supplier designed. The Pacifica and the Mercedes equivalent are two completely separate designs. No parts sharing at all there. The Crossfire is a Chrysler designed body on a Mercedes platform(SLK). Mercedes does not want their brand devalued by sharing parts with Chrysler. Chrysler doesn't use Mercedes parts since they are too expensive to be included in Chrysler's cost structures. | ||
Johnnny5 Member Username: Johnnny5 Post Number: 437 Registered: 06-2005 |
They share some engines... The Mercedes common rail diesel is available in the Liberty and a few other Chrysler products. They've also put the Dodge name on their Sprinter van which has become very popular in the past few years. | ||
Ndavies Member Username: Ndavies Post Number: 2454 Registered: 10-2003 |
The diesel was cut from the Liberty last year. That engine won't meet the new Diesel emission requirements. The only other diesels in Chrysler's current lineup are the Cummins engines in the Dodge trucks. Mercedes diesels are scheduled for future vehicles. Rearranging engine options is a no brainer if the companies separate. There are plenty of third party diesel engines available for replacements. They would also execute technology licensing agreements to cover currently in use technology. | ||
Scottr Member Username: Scottr Post Number: 302 Registered: 07-2006 |
You have a good point on the Sprinter, but I bet that will continue on as Mercedes-built, Dodge-branded. Deals like that happen often - remember all the GM rumors started with an idea for building a large GMT900 based SUV for Chrysler. Chrysler will be building a minivan for VW, too, and already builds the Dakota-based Mitsubishi Raider. Or, if Mercedes balks at that, they could just use the Mercedes brand as they do overseas, although I doubt that, since that could water down their image over here. Regarding engines, that's no big deal either, companies can and do share engines (and transmissions, and almost any other component) as well. The current Vue Red Line uses a Honda engine, for example. | ||
Upinottawa Member Username: Upinottawa Post Number: 749 Registered: 09-2005 |
I have been unable to find anything about the "auction" on the Freep or the DetNews online. Either I am missing the headlines (on those sites), or there is something fishy about Channel 4's report. | ||
Beavis1981 Member Username: Beavis1981 Post Number: 196 Registered: 08-2006 |
Is nobody aware that the stupid rednecks precious hemi! engines are built exclusively in mexico? | ||
Leland_palmer Member Username: Leland_palmer Post Number: 227 Registered: 08-2004 |
Upinottawa there are a number of auction stories out there. http://news.google.com/news?hl =en&ned=us&ie=UTF-8&q=chrysler +auction&btnG=Search | ||
Ndavies Member Username: Ndavies Post Number: 2456 Registered: 10-2003 |
The auction rumor started here. Channel 4 just repeated it. http://business.timesonline.co .uk/tol/business/industry_sect ors/engineering/article1403683 .ece | ||
Korridorkid Member Username: Korridorkid Post Number: 51 Registered: 01-2005 |
Funny--I always was under the impression that the Daimler-Benz/Chrysler merger was rather equal, but the more I read on it, and the more info posted here I have come to the eloquent realization that... Chrysler was totally Daimler-Benz's bitch... I should have seen it coming... | ||
Scottr Member Username: Scottr Post Number: 305 Registered: 07-2006 |
Yeah, that's it in a nutshell. and now Chrysler's being kicked out to the curb. It'll be even worse if Daimler tries to keep Jeep. (I doubt it... but I rule out nothing at this point.) | ||
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard Post Number: 2582 Registered: 10-2004 |
Chrysler was always the ugly sister. Even when it was Mercedes that did poorly, and Chrysler didn't. I figure if Mr. Z wasn't the CEO, Chrysler would have been gone already. | ||
Korridorkid Member Username: Korridorkid Post Number: 52 Registered: 01-2005 |
Interesting idea Livernoisyard-- (playing devil's advocate) Couldn't Zetsche been seen as kind of the plundering mustachioed pirate in this sense? Granted he wasn't the CEO when the merger finalized it still seems like he may be spearheading this whole descision. What made him hold on to the name until now, when he's punting it like a Lion's Hail Mary play? Chrysler has got to feel like crap though...being merged, used and tossed. (general terms, arguable--yes) | ||
Danny Member Username: Danny Post Number: 5538 Registered: 02-2004 |
YES!! Tossed by the Europeans Car manufactures because they think that Americans are STOOPID!!!! Chrysler is long gone. It is finished. Thanks a lot Dr.Z. Stay out of Detroit! | ||
Charlottepaul Member Username: Charlottepaul Post Number: 547 Registered: 10-2006 |
At least we will have the BIG THREE back! Well, I mean two. Nevermind, just one. | ||
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard Post Number: 2583 Registered: 10-2004 |
quote: Probably just one. Ford today (Tuesday afternoon) said that they were going through their final wad of money twice as fast as planned and wanted their workers to take a salary and wage cut of 20%. I imagine that this was sent to the UAW and other worker groups. This report came via the 4PM news on WJR if anybody wants the source. | ||
Jerome81 Member Username: Jerome81 Post Number: 1308 Registered: 11-2003 |
Mercedes has always thought they know everything about everything. It is what lead them into the Chrysler/Hyundai/Mitsubishi mess. It is what led them down the poor quality road (MercedesBenz vehicles used to be built to a standard, and cost a boatload, but they were damn near bullet proof). It is what led them to dilute the brand from ultra expensive, amazingly engineered sedans and coupes to trying to build a Mercedes for everyone. Everything from the $23,000 230 Kompressor, to the M Class SUV, to the GL SUV to the god-awful, hideous, minivan with 4 doors R-Class. Building their cars to a price and to meet the needs of everyone (hey, now I can buy a mercedes with no money down and 1.9% financing!!) they have killed their legendary quality and their legendary exclusivity. Then they believed they wanted not only a M-B for everyone, but to be a world-wide enterprise, with an American, Japanese (Mitsu), and Korean (Hyundai) arm. So they started buying up stakes in those companies. Hyundai initally bit, then told them to F-off, we're better on our own. Then they wanted to spend an ungodly number of billions to bail out Mitsu (to which, thank god, the DCX shareholders about had a mutiny over), they got Chrysler but for some reason never wanted to truly share anything between companies and then blamed Chrysler for all their problems. Now it is Chrysler's turn to get shat on. Chrysler has their own, huge, problems. But I don't think they're any stronger today than they were in 1998. Had DCX been formed with the gumption to actually share from day one, both Chrysler and MBZ might be better off today. Instead they acted as nearly independent enterprises that took turns floating and sucking off each other. I think the way the Germans have acted towards Chrysler (and their know-it-all attitude at MBZ in general) is horrendous. Chrysler deserved better or never should have merged at all. On the other hand, they still have some serious issues at Chrysler group, and got themselves into the trouble they're in today without much help from MBZ (since they operated pretty much on their own anyway). They've got some decent brands, but only a couple truly good, world class cars (think Ram trucks, Jeep Grand Cherokee and Wrangler, minivans, and the LX RWD cars). The rest are cheap, uncompetitive, low-quality wheels. And they banked too heavily on trucks while building hundreds of thousands of cars that consumers and dealerships didn't want. All those are messes they would likely would have been in with, or without, MBZ. Which is why I side with the shareholders. Chrysler did this mostly to themselves. But DCX didn't really do anything even close to what they should have to have made it work for both sides in the first place. I just worry now that GM might do the same thing MBZ just did. Buy em. Then not consolidate and share the way they should. I'd like to think GM isn't as dumb as the MBZ nuts (and they seem to actually be getting things right finally!), but GM has done a lot of really boneheaded things over the past 40 years..... | ||
Danny Member Username: Danny Post Number: 5549 Registered: 02-2004 |
Dr Z. Why are you selling Chrysler?  "Because you Americans can't sell a better car. It's better to sell the sloppy company then to keep it for nothing! As for right now I'm getting out of this so-called Motor City. It's full of Black dogs and White cats already." (Message edited by danny on February 20, 2007) | ||
3rdworldcity Member Username: 3rdworldcity Post Number: 460 Registered: 01-2005 |
My guess: DCX has just fired the first salvo in the upcoming UAW contract negotiations. Brilliant move!!!!! Those guys may be smarter that one would think. It's going to be a very interesting summer, labor contract-wise. | ||
Douglasm Member Username: Douglasm Post Number: 776 Registered: 10-2003 |
That's a good point, 3rdworld...... An interesting rumor that I heard this morning is that PSA Peugeot/Citroen has expressed an interest in purchasing Chrysler. I believe Peugeot was the one that bailed Chrysler out of their European disaster in the mid 80's. What Chrysler would bring is access to their dealer network. I'd sure like to see a Peugeot 107 in the flesh..... | ||
Trainman Member Username: Trainman Post Number: 340 Registered: 04-2006 |
This can possibly be an opportunity to help Michigan recover from bad economic times. By raising the sales tax just one cent on the dollar, we could raise an operating budget to save Chrysler to make cars. This will save thousands of good paying union jobs and bring back real estate values by getting more people to by buy homes with secure jobs. In addition, we will have more choices to buy Michigan cars. Transit advocacy groups want to fund mass transit with sales taxes to save both SMART and DDOT. So, why not save Chrysler also. It only makes sense since other counties such as Japan gives government support to their industries and we can't support public bus service at the fair box with just fuel taxes alone, which we learned from near forgotten Livonia Opt. So, lets have compassion and raise taxes to help fund transportation. We can do it and have the best freeways and new light-rail service and cars in the World with strong government leadership to best serve the needs of everyone. Imagine putting families first in Michigan and giving auto workers the chance to keep their jobs and to once again pay taxes to support our schools and balance the state budget. | ||
Scottr Member Username: Scottr Post Number: 307 Registered: 07-2006 |
Are you proposing that the State of Michigan raise taxes to buy Chrysler? Cause if you are... wow. I don't even know where to start refuting that argument. I guess first would be that raising the sales tax requires a vote, and that will take months, by that time Chrysler is long sold off. Or to question if there is anything more to your plan than just 'save jobs', that would actually make saving those jobs possible. Or that saving a few Chrysler jobs would bring back real estate values, given that Chrysler is only a small part of the problem - what about the gm, ford, and supplier jobs that have been lost? I could also question the ability of our money-losing state to turn around a money-losing international automaker, when it can't even manage its own business. But of course, all that has nothing to do with what you really want, which is to raise statewide taxes for light rail that will only service SE Michigan, and you'll try to piggyback it on any issue you can, no matter how unrelated, or how uninformed you clearly are. sorry. rant over. i now return you to your regularly scheduled discussion on a possible Chrysler auction. | ||
Ccbatson Member Username: Ccbatson Post Number: 116 Registered: 11-2006 |
Raise taxes? That's an answer? A comment so absurdly incorrect as to defy any plausible response. Take that idea, reverse it/or do the exact opposite, and then you will be heading in the right direction. | ||
Cambrian Member Username: Cambrian Post Number: 650 Registered: 08-2006 |
I'm not so sure that Daimler will go through with the sale. I know people who work at the Auburn Hills HQs and every thing is going on business as usual, no cancelled projects or nothing. I suspect this action may be just to appease German Shareholders who are out for blood. The rationale is, "See, we aint gonna get nothing for it if we sell it, so why not keep it?" | ||
Dougw Member Username: Dougw Post Number: 1571 Registered: 11-2003 |
Interesting perspective on the potential Chrysler sale... http://business.timesonline.co .uk/tol/business/columnists/ar ticle1444385.ece quote: |
