A Cold Hearted way to save Detroit car companies

Status
Not open for further replies.

Ray W

Enthusiast
Joined
Oct 28, 2000
Posts
906
Reaction score
0
Location
Fort Lauderdale,FL USA
The big three simply need to go back to the basics.
1. Stop building so many models. Instead offer maybe 4 distinct trim levels,super economy,intermediate,sport and luxury for maybe 3-4 cars.
2. Create demand for these cars by selling them for 8-10k less than current prices. Less research,crash testing and production costs on fewer car models.
3. Convert some plants to manufacturing parts that are currently out sourced.

Foreign companies are on our soil,building their cars with the same American work force, are successfull.
 

ViperTony

Enthusiast
Joined
Apr 3, 2006
Posts
7,554
Reaction score
0
Foreign companies are on our soil,building their cars with the same American work force, are successfull.

BINGO! If they can do it in our own back yards, why can't we follow suit? What's different between them? Nobody wants to face the facts, but the fact of the matter is the other auto's got it right. Better leadership perhaps? Non-union workforce? Much better quality? More lobbying in the govt? A strategy perhaps?

Here's a clue: No need for bailout, say diners near thriving car plant - CNN.com

Quit the f'ng crying in detroit, stop being the victim and take charge of the situation. Enough crying...just get it done already. Even congress want's a "Business Plan"...hey go figure. Now let's see if the Big 3 can dust off their Business 101 text books and figure out a business plan.

If you wouldn't invest your money in a business, let alone 3 of them, that has no strategy and no business plan than why would you let the government do the same with YOUR tax dollars?

Rip off the band-aid already and let's get the restructuring started before it really is too late.
 
Last edited:

Kevan

Enthusiast
Joined
Dec 11, 2006
Posts
2,556
Reaction score
1
Location
New Albany, OH
It's just amazing to me sometimes how ignorant the general public is about the inside working of corporate america. You don't need an MBA to know how things really work.

The amount of money a CEO spends to travel is so insignificant compared to the overall operating costs of a Fortune 500 manufacturing company. As it was mentioned before the executives have very limited time and need to be as efficient as possible. How often do you hear about lawmakers flying coach???:rolleyes: Heck, they're about to break to go on a 2 month vacation :dunno: Politicians have little incentive to do what's right for the long term. Since voters have short memories politicians only do what makes people happy to get them reelected and very little more. It's too difficult to implement policies for the long term.
Now hold on.
I'm living with a corporate executive, and I see EVERY DAY how it works (and doesn't work).
There are times when a company plane is needed, but this is not one of them. What those 3 clowns did is borderline criminal.

I'm terribly sorry, but in these rough economic times, I must revert to common sense when it comes to cost of travel.
Even if the company plane was $801 round-trip, it still makes more FINANCIAL sense to fly commercial.

And don't give me any BS about them "working" while on the plane. They're either sleeping, rubbing one out, or scheming. I was born at night, but it wasn't last night.

Image isn't cheap either.
I heard about a company that flew several of their employees to Europe (for 100% business meetings) via commercial instead of using their spiffy new corporate jet.
The cost of the tickets for the employees was 400% higher than using the company plane.....BUT....it certainly looks good when the company can say "we sent our execs on commercial flights."
BTW- it was almost TRIPLE the travel time going commercial. Like they say, time is money.....but I didn't factor that in.

I guess the windows in those offices on the top floor *do* open. Apparently smarts is the first thing that gets pitched out of them.

These days, ALL costs are significant.
 

GTSnake

Enthusiast
Joined
Oct 26, 2000
Posts
2,767
Reaction score
22
Location
Motor City
BINGO! If they can do it in our own back yards, why can't we follow suit? What's different between them? Nobody wants to face the facts, but the fact of the matter is the other auto's got it right. Better leadership perhaps? Non-union workforce? Much better quality? More lobbying in the govt? A strategy perhaps?

The biggest difference between the US and foreign OE's??? Three letters U-A-W. Which stands for "U Aint Workin" :D They have such a stranglehold on the automakers that they cannot break their grip. If management tries to make themselves more competitive by reducing wages or benefits, they strike. Sure hind sight says they should have bit the bullet and took them on a long time ago. But people got complacent and just put up with it. The time may be right to take a hard stance against the union. They have outlived their purpose and have become too powerful. With power comes corruption and greed and surely they have both those.:nono:
 

Bobpantax

Enthusiast
Joined
Oct 2, 2000
Posts
6,957
Reaction score
3
Location
Miami
Whatever is done or not done to address the issues will feel like a "cold hearted way" to many. A type of slow "reorganization" was underway in the industry before the recent crisis. Mr. N was brought in to do it at Chrysler and Mr. M was brought in to do it at Ford. Take a look at the Allpar posts concerning Chrysler's plans to reduce product offerings, etc.

As for the hearing in DC, it was interesting to me that the three went there to beg for money together but did not travel together. They could have used the time to coordinate their presentation and responses. Instead their aggregate response to the questions was one of the most unprepared, insensitive and ignorant displays of corporate arrogance ever to grace the halls of the Senate. Their complete failure to display the type of leadership skills and thought provoking ideas one would have expected at such an important hearing was infuriating.

I still believe there will be a "bailout" plan. I think it will be based on a tweaked version of the 1979 Chrysler bailout legislation. The 1979 legislation was pretty thorough and contained a provision for adequate oversight.

The Democrats know that Obama will not be "running against Bush" in 2012. They also know that campaigning for the 2012 election started on November 5th. There is no way they are going to abandon millions of probable Democratic voters employed directly and indirectly by the Big Three.
 

ViperTony

Enthusiast
Joined
Apr 3, 2006
Posts
7,554
Reaction score
0
The biggest difference between the US and foreign OE's??? Three letters U-A-W. Which stands for "U Aint Workin" :D They have such a stranglehold on the automakers that they cannot break their grip. If management tries to make themselves more competitive by reducing wages or benefits, they strike. Sure hind sight says they should have bit the bullet and took them on a long time ago. But people got complacent and just put up with it. The time may be right to take a hard stance against the union. They have outlived their purpose and have become too powerful. With power comes corruption and greed and surely they have both those.:nono:

I think unions have outgrown their usefulness. That's my opinion and I do have experience first-hand with unions and have seen their positive and negative effects on an organization. I think the CNN article speaks for itself on the matter. Personally, I'd like to see the gradual phase-out of unions altogether from the Big Three's business strategy but as Bob mentioned that is not likely to happen with Obama and the democrats over the next 4 years.
 

ryan94rt10

Viper Owner
Joined
Sep 26, 2005
Posts
352
Reaction score
0
Location
Columbus, Ohio
"that's pretty difficult when you're handicapped by huge pension costs and UAW wages where your competitors don't have that disadvantage."

i believe the unions are causing the biggest problems to the american auto industry.

my small busines works jobs side by side with union workers, and it is amazing how unproductive these workers are. they show up at 8 a.m., then have a half hour break at 9 a.m., then a full hour lunch at 12 p.m., then another half hour break at 2 p.m. and then they leave at 4 p.m.

all the while, my guys and i work during all of these breaks, except a 1/2 hour lunch..we are not union, so our perception is, to get on the job and get done with the job as fast as possible...even if it makes us stay til dark. this make us bring in the largest proifit, which inturn allows me to pay them the highest wages...not to just get my 40 hrs in this week and then come back next week and ge another 40 more...this is where the underlining problems are...and with barak going to open the union vote up, that is just going to make the union stronghold even larger...and more intimidating!!! yikes....:omg:
 
Joined
Apr 2, 2005
Posts
3,091
Reaction score
0
Location
Ft. Lauderdale, Florida
Whatever is done or not done to address the issues will feel like a "cold hearted way" to many. A type of slow "reorganization" was underway in the industry before the recent crisis. Mr. N was brought in to do it at Chrysler and Mr. M was brought in to do it at Ford. Take a look at the Allpar posts concerning Chrysler's plans to reduce product offerings, etc.

As for the hearing in DC, it was interesting to me that the three went there to beg for money together but did not travel together. They could have used the time to coordinate their presentation and responses. Instead their aggregate response to the questions was one of the most unprepared, insensitive and ignorant displays of corporate arrogance ever to grace the halls of the Senate. Their complete failure to display the type of leadership skills and thought provoking ideas one would have expected at such an important hearing was infuriating.

I still believe there will be a "bailout" plan. I think it will be based on a tweaked version of the 1979 Chrysler bailout legislation. The 1979 legislation was pretty thorough and contained a provision for adequate oversight.

The Democrats know that Obama will not be "running against Bush" in 2012. They also know that campaigning for the 2012 election started on November 5th. There is no way they are going to abandon millions of probable Democratic voters employed directly and indirectly by the Big Three.

Nardelli wasn't the right hire, Jim Press from Toyota USA was, he's a real competent, true car guy, who knows what he's doing.

We all know somethings going to be done to fix the big 3, loan, bailout, bankruptcy, something, and we will all pay dearly for it for a good many years to come.

Yes, the UAW mentions the new workers are coming in with much smaller pay and benefit packages, but what they don't tell you is when workers get layed off, like the big 3 have been doing for a while now, the ones with the least amount of seniority go first, and the ones with the longest stay, so labor cost and benefits remain high.

Therefore, when the big 3 announce layoffs, its the people that have been there the longest who are the most protected.
 

GTSnake

Enthusiast
Joined
Oct 26, 2000
Posts
2,767
Reaction score
22
Location
Motor City
Yes, the UAW mentions the new workers are coming in with much smaller pay and benefit packages, but what they don't tell you is when workers get layed off, like the big 3 have been doing for a while now, the ones with the least amount of seniority go first, and the ones with the longest stay, so labor cost and benefits remain high

You're right but at least it's a start. From where the union contracts were before this is a monumental change. It's a small crack in the armor but it will get bigger.
 
Joined
Apr 2, 2005
Posts
3,091
Reaction score
0
Location
Ft. Lauderdale, Florida

GR8_ASP

Enthusiast
Joined
May 28, 1998
Posts
5,637
Reaction score
1
Gee, GM is in 34-countries, which means they are a foreign company in 33 countries, so don't use the rheteric against Toyota USA, Honda USA, etc., etc. as auto transplants, when every car company in the country is selling cars all around the world, in other countries, not their own.

GM, Chrysler making deep cuts to hold on for loans: Financial News - Yahoo! Finance
Thank you for making a very positive point. Having companies spread out globally is good for the home countries economy (assuming it is not to produce externally things for internal consumption).

The converse, which is what you keep trying to make sound good, is good for JAPAN. Not the USA. It obviously may be good in local regions but is a negative in the grand total.

As for GM they are in most regions of the world as a producer for those regions (not as a primary exporter back to the US). That means profits come back to the US. Profits to US = Good. Profits to Japan = Bad.

Now just how many companies does Japan allow to be in their midst? Or what is Japan's import amount for major goods? When you read into that you will find out how Japan has accummulated over $500 Billion dollars from America. What will they do when they have enough to buy us (or China for that matter)?

Tell me what the total percentage of the Japanese car market is of total imports (from any country). America indeed would be fine if the playing field was level. But Japanese will not buy foreign cars, no matter what. China will not allow reasonable importation of them and will not allow foreign ownership of a company. It is a downhill slope for them to come here (with huge taxpayer provided bribes) but near impossible for Americans to go there.
 

Chuck 98 RT/10

Enthusiast
Joined
Oct 15, 2000
Posts
17,923
Reaction score
0
Location
tampa, fl USA
Gee, GM is in 34-countries, which means they are a foreign company in 33 countries, so don't use the rheteric against Toyota USA, Honda USA, etc., etc. as auto transplants, when every car company in the country is selling cars all around the world, in other countries, not their own.

True and it's homogenized somewhat but there is still potential for a big trade deficit between a country of 300 million and a country of 127 million.
 
Joined
Apr 2, 2005
Posts
3,091
Reaction score
0
Location
Ft. Lauderdale, Florida
Since 90% of my business for the past 20-years is a company that does $12 billion a year, with almost 5000 US employees, all I can say is, thank you, and not fault them for selling a quailty product that people want to buy.
 

Disturbed

Viper Owner
Joined
May 20, 2007
Posts
753
Reaction score
0
Location
Orlando, FL
Like a lot of people have mentioned, perception is everything.

They had a chance to make an impression and they blew it.

Even if you own/manage a small company...and you see worries and concerns...I don't know about you guys, but, why would you drive your $ 100k car to work? I mean, it would make sense to leave it at home and not park it in the lot...I would think it is certainly discouraging to others.

Even a Viper...which some are worth less than a big SUV...but perception, perception, perception. A lot of people don't have a clue how much our cars are worth but they assume that because it is a Viper it is an exotic creature (they look it though). I haven't driven my Viper to work since I bought it for that same reason.


I agree, people think I make a lot of money because I am the only person who works in my family but all my cars are paid off. The 01 ACR, 06 CLK and the 04 QX56. In all, I've spend less than 90k(OTD) in cars..that is like buying 1 new Viper. If I were to have bought all these cars new I would have paid about 200k+Tax! Heck, that's only 25k less than I bought my 3bed 3bath 3car house for. :omg:

As far as automakers go. The preception that american cars **** is still alive and well. The reality is, GM has some really nice cars right now. CTS,G6, G8, Escalade, Vette, Sky ect. The issue is.

For me, I'd rather buy an 04 BMW 745Li w/30kmi...than a new G8(not that I don't like the car) I would put that 20kmi on in less than a year...maybe two. They cost about the same.

I am in rental cars M-F. I always try to get the new Malibu. It IS better than the Honda Accord. The Accord feels like a pile of crap vs the Malibu. The Coblt SS...is far more fun than a Civic Si. I also like the Enclave better than the RX330.

Point in case...GM really is making good cars.


How do we fix this mess. Easy...give the money to the people, let us decide who to bail out with the products we buy or the debts we pay off. Give each house hold 100k...I bet this economy would be right on track as fast as they could get the money to us.
 
Joined
Apr 2, 2005
Posts
3,091
Reaction score
0
Location
Ft. Lauderdale, Florida
A Japanese company (Toyota) and an American company (GM) decided to
have a canoe race on the Missouri River. Both teams practiced long
and hard to reach their peak performance before the race.
On the big day, the Japanese won by a mile.

The Americans, very discouraged and depressed, decided to investigate
the reason for the crushing defeat. A management team made up
of senior management was formed to investigate and recommend
appropriate action.

Their conclusion was the Japanese had 8 people rowing and 1 person
steering, while the American team had 8 people steering and 1 person
rowing.

Feeling a deeper study was in order, American management hired a
consulting company and paid them a large amount of money for a second
opinion.

They advised, of course, that too many people were steering the boat,
while not enough people were rowing.

Not sure of how to utilize that information, but wanting to prevent
another loss to the Japanese, the rowing team's management structure
was totally reorganized to 4 steering supervisors, 3 area steering
superintendents, and 1 assistant superintendent steering manager.

They also implemented a new performance system that would give the 1
person rowing the boat greater incentive to work harder. It was
called the 'Rowing Team Quality First Program,' with meetings,
dinners, and free pens for the rower... There was discussion of
getting new paddles, canoes, and other equipment, extra vacation days
for practices and bonuses.

The next year the Japanese won by two miles.

Humiliated, the American management laid off the rower for poor
performance, halted development of a new canoe, sold the paddles,
and canceled all capital investments for new equipment. The money
saved was distributed to the Senior Executives as bonuses and the
next year's racing team was out-sourced to India.

Sadly.............. The End.

Here's something else to think about:
GM has spent the last thirty years moving all its factories out of
the US, claiming they can't make money paying American wages.

TOYOTA has spent the last thirty years building more than a dozen
plants inside the US.

The last quarter's results:

TOYOTA makes 4 billion in profits while GM racked up 9 billion in losses.
 

Frankster

Enthusiast
Joined
May 6, 2008
Posts
293
Reaction score
0
Location
California
We're supposed to let the market prevail when Americans choose to buy whatever vehicle. OK, I'll go along with that. Let the market prevail! Survive or die on the strenght of your own business savvy.

As a side note, I think the root core cause of our current crisis is high energy costs. Of course energy is cheap right now but you know it's not going to stay that way.

So, the solution? America needs an energy policy designed to remove the need to import oil.

I'd like to buy one of these cars (Aptera) but they only sell them in California.


If 200 million drove vehicles like this one we wouldn't have a crisis.
 

GR8_ASP

Enthusiast
Joined
May 28, 1998
Posts
5,637
Reaction score
1
A Japanese company (Toyota) and an American company (GM) decided to
have a canoe race on the Missouri River. Both teams practiced long
and hard to reach their peak performance before the race.
On the big day, the Japanese won by a mile.

The Americans, very discouraged and depressed, decided to investigate
the reason for the crushing defeat. A management team made up
of senior management was formed to investigate and recommend
appropriate action.

Their conclusion was the Japanese had 8 people rowing and 1 person
steering, while the American team had 8 people steering and 1 person
rowing.

Feeling a deeper study was in order, American management hired a
consulting company and paid them a large amount of money for a second
opinion.

They advised, of course, that too many people were steering the boat,
while not enough people were rowing.

Not sure of how to utilize that information, but wanting to prevent
another loss to the Japanese, the rowing team's management structure
was totally reorganized to 4 steering supervisors, 3 area steering
superintendents, and 1 assistant superintendent steering manager.

They also implemented a new performance system that would give the 1
person rowing the boat greater incentive to work harder. It was
called the 'Rowing Team Quality First Program,' with meetings,
dinners, and free pens for the rower... There was discussion of
getting new paddles, canoes, and other equipment, extra vacation days
for practices and bonuses.

The next year the Japanese won by two miles.

Humiliated, the American management laid off the rower for poor
performance, halted development of a new canoe, sold the paddles,
and canceled all capital investments for new equipment. The money
saved was distributed to the Senior Executives as bonuses and the
next year's racing team was out-sourced to India.

Sadly.............. The End.

Here's something else to think about:
GM has spent the last thirty years moving all its factories out of
the US, claiming they can't make money paying American wages.

TOYOTA has spent the last thirty years building more than a dozen
plants inside the US.

The last quarter's results:

TOYOTA makes 4 billion in profits while GM racked up 9 billion in losses.

Well, let's make a more accurate assessment of the race.

First, in order to ensure the Japanese team would race Alabama put up the funds to buy the newest and best boat available, approximately 50% of the overall cost of the boat.

Then, to further entice them Alabama offered to pay 100k per worker for training. Nothing but the best would be used to train the future oarsman. Nothing but the best training materials and methods available would do.

Then the US government decided it would not be fair to have them both go in equal directions so they taxed the American team by having them oar upstream, at an additional 10% rate.

Meanwhile the Japanese goverment provided laboratory testing to provide the most efficient means of providing the motive power through the use of higher education and study grants. The result of the grants was the creation of a new hybrid oar technology that would save the oarsman energy.

And then off to the races. Though the American team was over burdened, overtaxed and rowing upstream they were gaining on the mighty Japanese team through the pure efforts of the employees and American ingenuity. Until the loan for the boat came due and no banks would provide financing to keep the boat or buy another. They came to find out the loss of the loan was directly due to poor governmental control over home finances. So they went to the source of the whole financial mess and were told to go pound sand. So the oarsman were left holding their oars with no boat.

Moral of the story. Never believe a politician trying to cover for their own mistakes and prejudice. And where is/was the scrutiny of the AIGs, Fannnie and Freddie and the rest while dipping into the 700B pool. Much better to focus attention on those auto scumbags who collectively were looking for governmental loans totaling 3.5% of what the financial organizations will receive. Heaven forbid Wall Street pays for their own mistakes. Let's make the businesses that were impacted suffer instead.

Pandering to the foreign companies will ultimately make us beholden to them. They will own us. Our land, our property and our children. Japan and China already have a $500 Billion start in the ownership process.
 

kwiksilver

Enthusiast
Joined
Aug 27, 2005
Posts
272
Reaction score
0
Location
indy area
that is a lot closer to the truth than most people think. what's it gonna take America. let's buy American.:usa:
 

GTSnake

Enthusiast
Joined
Oct 26, 2000
Posts
2,767
Reaction score
22
Location
Motor City
that is a lot closer to the truth than most people think. what's it gonna take America. let's buy American.:usa:

The solution is not to just buy American. The solution is to unburden the US car makers so they can compete on a level playing field and offer competitive products on a global scale so everyone would want to buy American.
 

ViperTony

Enthusiast
Joined
Apr 3, 2006
Posts
7,554
Reaction score
0
The solution is not to just buy American. The solution is to unburden the US car makers so they can compete on a level playing field and offer competitive products on a global scale so everyone would want to buy American.

Imagine if that were the case today...well said.
 

Warfang

Enthusiast
Joined
Nov 27, 2004
Posts
6,912
Reaction score
0
Location
California, East Bay
OP
OP
T

Tom F&L GoR

Enthusiast
Joined
Oct 3, 2000
Posts
4,984
Reaction score
7
Location
Wappingers Falls
I'd be more impressed if Nardelli rolls up in an ACR, and does a doughnut in front of the Capitol. Gets out with camera rolling, points to the "0" skidmark on the ground and proclaim that how much he wants from the government. Then gets back in and peels off into the sunset. :D


C'mon, you forgot to say which finger he was pointing with...:devgrin:
 

RTTTTed

Viper Owner
Joined
Jun 6, 2007
Posts
6,438
Reaction score
1
It's starting to look as though Canada is going to get a new Government so that Quebec and Ontario get Federal support to bail out the big three?

All 3 election losing parties are banding together to form a "Co-allition" Government. NDP, Liberal and Quebec Separatist parties have signed an agreement to oust the elected Federal Government from power.

The presiding governemnt said that they wouldn't raise taxes (read no billions for auto makers) and the Quebecer Stephan Dione decided that HE has to head the government. He's only the Liberal party leader for another few months because of his great "Raise the taxes and create a Federal Carbon Tax" election platform was weak. Federal Government already gets nearly 50% of the fuel tax from the West and Dione wants to raise that a whole bunch more. He wants to bail out the auto industry to save jobs in Quebec and Ontario.

I think that if the US can't afford it neither can Western Canada. If Ontario and Quebec can afford to spend those Billions of dollars great, it won't get me anything to pay another few thousand dollars in taxes. Just like the BC 2010 Olympics I pay and pay, and I'll receive less services for my increased taxes.

Politicians give themselves a 60% pay raise and add new taxes for that. I provide Gov. services and after 20 years I need a raise in pay, not taxes.

Ted
 
Joined
Apr 2, 2005
Posts
3,091
Reaction score
0
Location
Ft. Lauderdale, Florida
CARS:

Buy American means what today?

Is Toyota or Honda more American than Ford, GM or Chrysler?

Ford owns or had an ownership interest in several makes:
Mazda, Aston Martin, Jaguar, Land Rover, Volvo, etc.

GM owns or had an ownership interest in several makes:
Daewoo, Fiat, Fuji, Holden, Isuzi, Opel, Saab, Subaru, Suzuki, Vauxhall, etc., etc.

Chrysler owns or had an ownership interest in several makes:
Hyundai, Mercedes (reverse ownership), Mitsubishi, smart, etc., etc.

Where was your car built? Mexico, Canada, etc.

What plants are the Big 3 closing down? in the US or foreign plants?

When the Big 3 lays off workers, what plants are they being lay off from?
 

Bobpantax

Enthusiast
Joined
Oct 2, 2000
Posts
6,957
Reaction score
3
Location
Miami
Maybe I am missing something but I do not see how the Big Three can be "bailed out"? Why? Read below and then note the following:
1. The auto industry appears to have expanded its capacity to cater to the distorted demand for cars that was created by easy credit and people borrowing against their home equity to buy depreciable goods - like cars.
2. The easy credit is gone and the home equity is significantly reduced or gone for millions.
3. The industry, based on the numbers below, currently has enormous excess capacity most of which is unlikely to be used next year and probably for longer than that.
4. How does providing money to the Big Three produce more sales?
5. How does providing money to the Big Three save jobs since plants have to be shut down anyway?
6. Assume the funds are used to accelerate the production of alternate fuel and hybrid vehicles. How does this help if the volume of customers necessary to keep the Big Three afloat is not there due to restricted credit conditions and unemployment across all sectors?
7. Wouldn't it make more sense to use the "bail out" money to buy out employees, expedite plant closings and shrink the Big Three down to where they need to be to survive? In other words, use the money to cushion the fall for those retired, fired, and permanently layed off and, perhaps, also make job retraining available to those who want it. Wouldn't this be cheaper and more humane in the long run? After all, it was not the job of the most vulnerable economically to manage these companies and anticipate future trends.
What do you think?


[FONT=Verdana,Sans-serif]Auto sales hit new lows; GM sales plunge 41 pct.[/FONT]


[FONT=Verdana,Sans-serif]Dec 2, 2:17 PM (ET)[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana,Sans-serif]By BREE FOWLER [/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana,Sans-serif]
You must be registered for see images
[FONT=Verdana,Sans-serif](AP) The offers of a cash rebate or zero percent interest are written on the windshield as an enticement...[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana,Sans-serif]Full Image[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana,Sans-Serif,Arial]Google sponsored links[/FONT][FONT=Verdana,Sans-Serif,Arial]Black Friday GM Rebates - Buy below dealer invoice w/Year End Thanksgiving GM Sales & Specials
GM.CarBuyingDiscounts.com

Ford Liquidation Event - All Remaining '08 Models Must Sell! See Prices from Overstocked Dealers
FordPrices.ConnectWithLife.c

[/FONT]

p {margin:12px 0px 0px 0px;}
NEW YORK (AP) - General Motors' November U.S. sales plunged 41 percent, while Ford's dropped 31 percent, dashing hopes that the industrywide drop in vehicle demand might be easing as Detroit's automakers prepare to state their second case for a federal bailout.
Their overseas rivals posted abismal results as well. Toyota's November sales tumbled 34 percent, and Honda's fell 32 percent.
A dreary economy, swooning consumer confidence and tight credit markets have combined to keep consumers out of vehicle showrooms this year. On Monday, the National Bureau of Economic Research said the U.S. entered a recession in December 2007, much earlier than most predictions.
October's seasonally adjusted annual sales rate of 10.6 million vehicles was worst in more than 25 years and far below the rate of 16 million a year earlier, according to Autodata Corp.
You must be registered for see images
[FONT=Verdana,Sans-serif](AP) Unsold 2009 pickup trucks are reflected in the chromed grille of an unsold 2009 Super Duty pickup...[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana,Sans-serif]Full Image[/FONT]Many analysts had expected November sales to come in slightly better, noting that aggressive incentive spending and the plunge in gasoline prices may have put a floor under sales. But GM, Ford, Toyota and Honda Motor Co. (HMC) (HMC) all posted month-over-month sales declines, pointing to a potential industrywide drop.
Detroit-based General Motors Corp. (GM) (GM) reported a 44 percent drop in demand for cars, while light truck sales dropped 39 percent. "In November we saw the continuation of the dramatic decline in volume for the industry," Mark LaNeve, GM's vice president of North American sales, said in a statement released by the company. "Every manufacturer is posting awful numbers and we are no exception." Jim Farley, Ford Motor Co. (F) (F)'s group vice president of marketing, said he expects the industry to post continued year-over-year decines in auto sales until at least the second half of 2009.

[/FONT]


#article { width: 665px; }
 

GR8_ASP

Enthusiast
Joined
May 28, 1998
Posts
5,637
Reaction score
1
Bob - its late but some specific comments:

1. The auto industry appears to have expanded its capacity to cater to the distorted demand for cars that was created by easy credit and people borrowing against their home equity to buy depreciable goods - like cars. Yes, this is true. But should ALL of the contraction be from the US Based auto manufacturers?

2. The easy credit is gone and the home equity is significantly reduced or gone for millions. This sounds like a comment. However, it is not just the "easy" credit (which I assume to be credit provided to questionable buyers, and low lease/loan deals) but credit of any kind. In the documents submitted to congress you will find statements regarding the size of lost sales attributed to the unavailability of credit for dealers and customers. 50% of all retail customers and 75% of dealerships have utilized OEM provided loans. Those dried up with the financial market crisis. This has impacted US based manufacturers more as they have not either the relationships with the banks or governments that foreign competitors enjoy (I guess this is a time when it is good to have a large ownership share by a bank).

3. The industry, based on the numbers below, currently has enormous excess capacity most of which is unlikely to be used next year and probably for longer than that. All forecasts provided to congress use very low prediction of US car market. In the vicinity of 13M/yr. Chrysler alone has shed 1/3 of its capacity in 1 year. Again do you expect the entire market shrinkage to be borne by US automakers? What happens when the market returns to the expected longer term amount of 15 to 16M. Is it fulfilled only by foreign interests? And do not believe Mr. Sellshomes above. The foreign industry here provides jobs for the low wage earning portion of the company. The high wage earners are predominantly Japanese. Check Toyota or Honda total company payroll versus US payroll. Follow the money trail. Same for their transplant parts suppliers. If that was not true he would not have such a lucrative business relocating all those Japanese here in the US.

4. How does providing money to the Big Three produce more sales? It allows people and dealers to borrow again. That caused a 20% market reduction overnight.

5. How does providing money to the Big Three save jobs since plants have to be shut down anyway? This statement makes no sense. Inefficient plants are closing. Not newer, more efficient plants.

6. Assume the funds are used to accelerate the production of alternate fuel and hybrid vehicles. How does this help if the volume of customers necessary to keep the Big Three afloat is not there due to restricted credit conditions and unemployment across all sectors? This is included in the DOE loan program and not part of this request. This request is to provide funds specifically for credit and operations. Not ER&D or new product launch.


Now for Mr. SellsHomes


Buy American means what today? American OWNED and operated corporations. Places that have R&D, design and manufacturing principally located here for vehicles sold here. Manufacturing is only 1 element of that.

Is Toyota or Honda more American than Ford, GM or Chrysler? Absolutely not. Not even close. That you think this means you have been infected by your financial relationship with the foreign transplants. That freaking huge lot in LA with Japanese cars is pure import. The transplants, which constitute less than half of what they sell, has a very high ratio of Japanese provided parts (both by Japanese transplant part suppliers or direct Japanese parts). Go to those plants and see where the parts and materials are coming from.

Ford owns or had an ownership interest in several makes:
Mazda, Aston Martin, Jaguar, Land Rover, Volvo, etc.

GM owns or had an ownership interest in several makes:
Daewoo, Fiat, Fuji, Holden, Isuzi, Opel, Saab, Subaru, Suzuki, Vauxhall, etc., etc.

Chrysler owns or had an ownership interest in several makes:
Hyundai, Mercedes (reverse ownership), Mitsubishi, smart, etc., etc.

Well I can see you are using internet knowledge and it escapes you here. The only one above that has truth for Chrysler is Mitsubishi. Which was a stock ownership and did not constitute operating level of ownership. You missed Lambo though :) But really, if they continue as independent divisions it only means profits come to the US and help feed the US governmental system. Adminstration costs for the divisions provides US jobs. What the relationships did result in was a higher degree of US designed and produced component parts in those vehicles. Like a Ford engine in that Jaguar. So the fact that they became US owned increased the US basis for the product and employment in the US. Exactly the opposite of what a transplant company here does when displacing a US based manufacturers product (moving a significant amount of jobs to Japan, including almost all of the higher paying jobs).

Where was your car built? Mexico, Canada, etc. My cars were built in Detroit Michigan, Toledo Ohio and Sterling Heights Michigan. Engines were all built in Detroit. Transmissions all built in Indiana. Interiors all produced by US suppliers. Body panels all stamped by Chrysler, predominantly in Ohio. And more than that they were conceived, designed, engineered, tested and marketed here in the US with US employees.

What plants are the Big 3 closing down? in the US or foreign plants? We have no non-North American assembly plants. I am not including plants that build up exported parts from kits used only in the export market (such as Venuzuela). I also include all North American in one conglomerate as our market share in Mexico and Canada supports having those locations. I am not aware of any new plant closings associated with the loan request. Chrysler has already commited to a 1/3 reduction in its capacity. The only previous large scale foreign plant was in Austria. That plant is now owned by Steyr.

When the Big 3 lays off workers, what plants are they being lay off from? 5200 retirements and buyouts last Wednesday were primarily from the headquarters and were all salaried or contract employees. Engineers, buyers, marketing, etc. That was over 1/3 of the white collar work force. Like similar reduction at GM and Ford the impact of losses of those types of jobs is devistating in the region. When a plant is closed workers are provided options related to relocating. Some take them and some do not. The workers ultimately released may not be at the actual location. It all depends.
 

Bobpantax

Enthusiast
Joined
Oct 2, 2000
Posts
6,957
Reaction score
3
Location
Miami
Here is the proposal from Chrysler. It is posted on ALLPAR. Considering how little time they had to put it together I think they did an excellent job. The proposal sounds reasonable and rational to me and answers many questions that I had and some I did not think too much about. If I was in Congress, I think that I would vote "yes" as to Chrysler. I do not know the deteails of what the other two put together.



You must be registered for see images attach
You must be registered for see images attach
You must be registered for see images attach
Ads by GoogleJeep® - Official Site
Visit Jeep.com - Get Quotes,
View Inventory & More Online Today.
www.Jeep.com
You must be registered for see images
Rockland Chrysler
Browse Our Huge Chrysler Inventory
Special Internet Pricing
www.RocklandChrysler.com
You must be registered for see images
Riverdale Chrysler Jeep
Full service Chrysler dealership.
New, Used, Parts, Service & More.
www.RiverdaleChryslerJeep.com
You must be registered for see images
Chrylser Jeep & Dodge
Drive it Now Prices on New and Used
Cars and Trucks at All American
AllAmericanDodgeMidland.com
You must be registered for see images
Chrysler Crossfire - MSN
Consumer reviews of the Crossfire.
Chrysler news & advice - MSN Autos.
Chrysler.Autos.MSN.com
You must be registered for see images
Aspen Car
Research and Compare the 2009
Ford Flex at Official Ford Site.
FordVehicles.com/Flex
You must be registered for see images

You must be registered for see images
You must be registered for see images
You must be registered for see images
You must be registered for see images
You must be registered for see images
You must be registered for see images
You must be registered for see images




Chrysler’s 2008 Recovery Plan for Congress

Chrysler only released this in PDF format, so there may be some errors, particularly in numbers, due to OCR issues.
Despite what Autoblog said about this being secret, the plan was made available to the media.
Chrysler background

Historically, Chrysler has been the one of most agile and innovative of the three Detroit automakers. This pioneering spirit has resulted in bold and successful business decisions including the acquisition of the Dodge and the Jeep brands, the invention of the legendary HEMI engine, and the creation of the Minivan. Today, Chrysler employs 55,000 workers worldwide, and sells approximately 2 million new vehicles each year, through a network of global dealers, including over 3,300 located in the United States. In 1979, Chrysler sought and received loan guarantees from the Federal Government to survive the economic recession and oil crisis of the late 1970s. These loans were paid back seven years early, and generated more than $300 million in equity returns to the American taxpayers. Even more significantly, the loan guarantees that helped return
Chrysler to health resulted in the Company's ability to continue to pay employees and suppliers, fund retiree health and pension benefits and pay local, state and Federal taxes for the past 30 years.
In 1998, Chrysler was acquired by Daimler and became a wholly-owned subsidiary of the large global automaker. As part of the integration, the Chrysler organization became functionally aligned with Daimler's German headquarters, and key functions were centralized in Germany. Chrysler's operating strategy and long-term product plans were optimized based on Daimler's overall global goals rather than Chrysler's stand-alone objectives.
In August 2007, Daimler sold a controlling interest in Chrysler to affiliates of Cerberus Capital Management L.P., creating the first privately held American auto company in 50 years. The dedicated men and women of Chrysler view the challenge of returning Chrysler to profitability as an opportunity of a lifetime, and are determined to restore this 83-year old, iconic American brand to one of stature in the automotive industry.
Mr. Nardelli was engaged by Chrysler immediately following the separation from Daimler in August 2007. New to the automotive industry, he recognized the need to question and challenge the status quo and sought significant opportunities to improve performance throughout the business. Under his leadership Chrysler launched an aggressive restructuring effort to address declining market conditions and to transform the business into an independent American auto company aligned with consumers' emerging needs.
Chrysler made tough decisions to reduce operating costs and adjusted production schedules immediately. Management prioritized every product investment with a strong emphasis on improving energy security and environmental sustainability by introducing advanced powertrain technologies. At the same time four unprofitable vehicle models were discontinued and over $1 billion in unprofitable assets were identified for sale, with more than 70% of those assets disposed of to date.
Since 2007, Chrysler has eliminated 1.2 million units of capacity, which represented over 30% of its previously installed capacity, and resulted in the elimination of 12 production shifts. Over the past 10 months alone Chrysler reduced its fixed costs by $2.4 billion. Unfortunately, by the end of 2008, Chrysler will have separated over 32,000 employees, including 5,000 white collar employees who left the company just this past Wednesday before Thanksgiving. Cost cutting has been substantial, swift and wide-ranging. Nothing has been viewed as "sacred."
According to the Harbor Report, Chrysler has increased its manufacturing productivity by 32% over the past 7 years to equal Toyota, the most productive automaker in North America in terms of hours of assembly per vehicle. This combined with the favorable hourly labor rates in the recently negotiated transformational labor agreement with the UAW is an important step toward making Chrysler's cost structure competitive with transplant manufacturing by 2010.
To further enhance its product portfolio, support growth and improve its cost structure, Chrysler continues to aggressively pursue strategic alliances and partnerships. Examples include our manufacturing agreement with Nissan whereby Chrysler will provide 100% of Nissan's full size truck manufacturing in North America beginning 2011. At the same time Chrysler will purchase a compact, fuel efficient car from Nissan for global markets beginning in 2010. Chrysler also became the sole supplier to VW for all its Minivan production in North America. Chrysler has also entered into alliances with suppliers to develop innovative powertrain technology to support improved fuel economy.
Further partnership, restructuring and consolidation represent a significant upside for the U.S. auto manufacturers in a global economy. Chrysler welcomes the opportunity to have an open discussion with the new Administration and Congress on a collaborative approach to restructuring that will ensure any Government resources invested in the industry are used efficiently and will advance important national public policy objectives.
1. Our Request

Chrysler is requesting a $7 billion secured working capital bridge loan by December 31, 2008. The existing senior secured lenders have advised Cerberus that they will work with the Company and the Government to provide mutually satisfactory collateral and priority.
The Company makes this extraordinary request to meet a short-term deficiency in our liquidity and working capital created by a perfect storm comprised of:
(a) the collapse in demand for light duty vehicles (2007 SAAR 16.2 million compared to 10.8 million run rate for the month of November 2008),
(b) the unprecedented financial crisis where even world-class companies like General Electric and Berkshire Hathaway must pay huge premiums for what was previously considered "AAA" credit, and many businesses have no access to credit at all (despite the best efforts of the Congress and Treasury to inject capital and create liquidity), and
(c) the general global economic downturn.
These events have jeopardized our ability to complete the dramatic restructuring plan that we began in 2007, before the commencement of the current economic crisis. Provision of the bridge loan will allow the Company to retain the confidence of its lenders, suppliers, dealers and employees and complete the on-going restructuring which we are confident will place the company on a path to long-term viability.
This submission to Congress contains the facts, assumptions and projected financial results that support Chrysler's belief that it will be financially viable throughout the plan cycle. Management believes this report and analysis demonstrates that Chrysler can and will emerge from this restructuring process as a significant and healthy player in the U.S. automotive market for years to come, and will be well positioned to begin repayment of the Federal loans in 2012. Chrysler believes that participating in the restoration of the Company's long-term viability without a bankruptcy filing significantly improves the outcome for all constituents.
2. Short –Term Cash Requirements

For the first six months of 2008 Chrysler LLC operations generated adequate working capital to fund its ongoing operations. The Company ended the first half of the year with approximately $9.4 billion of cash. However, the significant downturn in the U.S. automotive sector in the second half of this year began to deplete the Company's otherwise ample cash reserves.
Chrysler currently estimates that at year end it will have approximately $2.5 billion available cash on hand. In order to maintain appropriate working capital liquidity, and to bridge to the completion of the out-of-court restructuring and business plans described below, we are requesting the $7 billion secured bridge loan. During the period from January 1, 2009 through March 31, 2009, Chrysler anticipates making payments to the following parties:
Major ExpendituresQ1 2009Parts suppliers$ 8.0 billionOther vendors$ 1.2 billionWages$ 0.9 billionHealth care / legacy$500 millionOther expenditures$500 millionTotal expenditures$11.6 billionTraditionally, the first three months of the year are the months with the lowest sales volumes, and hence, the lowest cash flows. Chrysler anticipates sales to be even lower than normal due to the economic downturn, the credit crisis and the inability of dealers and customers to secure wholesale and retail financing, which places greater pressure on operating cash flows. As a result of the above, without an immediate working capital bridge, Chrysler's liquidity could fall below the level necessary to sustain the company through the first quarter of 2009.
3. Major Business Assumptions

Congress has asked whether Chrysler, if in receipt of the requested Federal loan, can achieve viability on a stand alone basis as a profitable company. As noted above, the Company has already made substantial strides towards that goal and as indicated in this submission, will pursue significant additional restructuring actions and seek meaningful concessions from each of its major constituents. Chrysler believes these actions, taken together, clearly demonstrate long-term viability. Management fully understands that it has to continue to drive revenues through responsible product development that support the country's energy security and environmental sustainability goals.
Chrysler remains focused upon developing partnerships, strategic alliances or a consolidation as a fundamental element of its restructuring to expand its product portfolio, generate incremental revenue, and create additional operational synergies related to manufacturing, purchasing and distribution. Management recognizes that in spite of the capacity reductions in the U.S. industry, there still exist opportunities for significant synergies through factory rationalization, sharing platforms and components (i.e., powertrain), and sharing new technical innovations (i.e., dual-mode hybrid drive systems) in a cost effective manner. Chrysler has conducted internal studies to identify the financial impact of an alliance or consolidation. Our estimates for annual synergies once fully implemented range between $3.5 and $9.0 billion.
Chrysler anticipates that the Federal loan will function as additional adequate assurance to our suppliers, customers and employees that the Company will make it through this extraordinary time in our nation's economy, assuming, among other things, that Chrysler Financial has financing capacity at the wholesale and retail level sufficient to support Chrysler's production volumes. At Chrysler, 75% of our dealers rely on Chrysler Financial to finance their business, and 50% of all customers finance their vehicle purchases through Chrysler Financial. With credit markets frozen, our customers – average working Americans – do not have access to competitive financing to purchase or lease vehicles...our dealers do not have access to market competitive funding to place wholesale orders for new vehicles ...resulting in the constriction of cash inflows to the Chrysler. Chrysler Financial is in need of immediately liquidity support.
Chrysler's salaried workforce will fully comply with the restrictions established under section 111 of EESA. The Company has already undertaken and will continue to undertake significant cost reduction actions, such as: suspending the Company's match portion of the 401(k) plan; terminating the lease car program; and asking more productivity of each employee as a result of the approximately 12,000 in headcount reductions over the past 2 years. Additionally, Chrysler has substantially increased all salaried employees' contribution to health care costs, suspended tuition reimbursement program benefits, and eliminated retiree life insurance benefits.
Mr. Nardelli receives an annual salary of $1 from Chrysler. In addition, Mr. Nardelli receives no health care, insurance or similar benefits from the Company. On average, Chrysler's executive salaries are in the 2nd quartile when compared to similarly situated companies, which in general, is below competitive market levels.
Furthermore, the Company did not pay salaried merit increases or performance bonuses in 2008, and has not planned salaried merit increases or performance bonuses for 2009. Management has no options or restricted stock units. Top management will continue to share in the sacrifices of the salaried workforce and bear 100% of their healthcare premium costs.
Product Development and Other Revenue Drivers

DOE - 136 funding : Chrysler applied on day one for $8.5 billion in 136 funding, $6 billion (or 70%) of which is factored into the planning period from 2009 – 2012. These funds will be absolutely critical for Chrysler to achieve its product plan to support energy security and environmental sustainability. (reference chart #51)
Providing Cars and Trucks People Want to Buy: Chrysler has made substantial progress in its product line to improve fuel efficiency, quality, technology and consumer appeal. During its first 60 days as an independent company, management approved more than 400 design changes representing an investment of half a billion dollars in improvements to product reliability, durability, fit and finish, and consumer appeal. Chrysler also offered its customers a lifetime powertrain warranty to build both confidence in its products and demonstrable quality. Due to a focused product quality improvement effort during the past year, Chrysler has seen its warranty claim rates drop by 29%. This improvement trend continues.
Chrysler's viability plan includes 24 major product launches through 2012, including a wide portfolio of hybrid electric-drive vehicles within several categories: Neighborhood Electric Vehicles (NEV), City Electric Vehicles (CEV), Range-extended Electric Vehicles (ReEV), and full-function battery electric vehicles (BEV).
Chrysler is the largest producer of all-electric vehicles in the U.S. Through its GEM (Global Electric Motorcars) division, Chrysler has produced over 40,000 NEVs during the past 10 years with significant market growth forecasted over the next several years.
The development of Chrysler's full function electric-drive vehicles is led by ENVI, the Company's in-house organization that was formed to focus on electric-drive production vehicles and related advance technologies. ENVI's initial focus is on establishing a market presence and technology leadership in electric-drive to further:
  • <LI itxtvisited="1">Reduce well-to-wheel energy consumption. <LI itxtvisited="1">Reduce petroleum dependency. <LI itxtvisited="1">Reduce tailpipe emissions and greenhouse gases. <LI itxtvisited="1">Increase energy efficiency.
  • Exceed consumer's expectations in the areas of fuel economy, cost-of- ownership, performance, comfort, utility, and safety.
Chrysler recently developed several advanced production-intent electric vehicles and publicly demonstrated our commitment to apply electric-drive technology to front-wheel- drive, rear-wheel-drive and body-on-frame four-wheel-drive platforms.
Chrysler's product plan includes the introduction of the first full function electric-drive model in 2010, and expansion to additional models by 2013. Chrysler will have close to 100 vehicles dedicated to testing and development within the Company, or assigned to Government and business evaluation fleets by the end of 2009. Chrysler's market *********** of electric-drive vehicles will further increase with over 500,000 produced by 2013 .
Our commitment to enhancing the nation's energy security and environmental sustainability also includes improving the performance of existing technology and support for flex fuel vehicles. For the 2009 model year, nineteen Dodge, Jeep and Chrysler models, or 73% of our product line, will offer improved fuel economy compared to previous models. The company has more than 1.7 million Flex Fuel Vehicles (FFV) on the road capable of running on 85% ethanol, and is on target to meet our commitment of 50% of our fleet being flex fuel capable by 2012.
Chrysler's ongoing commitment to safety is evident in industry ratings. For 2009 model year over 88% of Chrysler vehicles achieved NHTSA's highest possible rating-5 stars for frontal crash tests. 86% of Chrysler vehicles achieved the Government's highest rating for side impact protection.
4. 2009 – 2012 Financial Forecast

In order to complete a successful restructuring of Chrysler, the participation of many constituencies is essential.
Based upon the financial analysis included herein, which assumes:
(i) a reasonable level of support and concessions from the Company's constituencies
(ii) $6 billion in funds from our DOE 136 loan request: and
(iii) the $7 billion bridge loan:
the long-term viability of Chrysler will be ensured.
The detailed "bottom up" yearly forecasts for 2009-2012 were completed and critically challenged by all levels of senior management and the Company's independent outside advisors.
There are a number of key market and financial assumptions which directly impact the Company's level of profitability. Summarized below are the major assumptions made for the years 2009 – 2012:
Operating assumptions:
2009201020112012SAAR (light-duty, millions)11.112.113.713.7Chrysler share (%)10.410.710.710.7Chrysler U.S. unit sales (million)1.191.331.491.49Chrysler unit sales (worldwide)1.721.862.152.15Based upon the above operating assumptions, Chrysler projects that the financial results will be as set forth below:
Expected results
2009201020112012Operating profit$ 400 mil$2.6 b$2.0b$1.8 bNet cash change(-$2.0b)$2.3 b$1.6 b$1.1 bEnding cash balance$7.5 b$9.8 b$11.4 b$12.5 bThis includes an assumption of a $7 billion government bridge loan in 2009 and repayment of $1 billion of that loan in 2011.
Chrysler believes that its operating assumptions are appropriate and realistic for 2009 and 2010, given the current state of the economy and domestic vehicle market. With respect to 2011 and 2012, the Company assumes a trend upward in unit sales volumes as the economy gradually improves. However, even if growth assumptions are reached, management believes the annual unit sales volumes will remain approximately 20% below recent historical levels of 17 million vehicles annually.
The Company also prepared a sensitivity analysis assuming a 1 million unit higher and 1 million unit lower volume level for 2009 through 2012. The results are as follows:
Sensitivity higher case (1 million unit annual increase)
2009201020112012SAAR (light-duty, millions)12.1 13.1 14.7 14.7 Operating income$800 mil$3 bil$2.4 bil$2.2 bilNet cash change(-$1.2 bil)$3.1 bil$2.4 bil$1.1 bilEnding cash balance$8.3 bil$11.4 bil$13.8 bil$14.9 bilSensitivity lower case (1 million unit annual decrease)
2009201020112012SAAR (light-duty, millions)10.111.112.712.7Operating income0$2.2 b$1.6 b$1.4 bNet cash change(-$2.8b)$1.5 b$800 m$1.1 bEnding cash balance$6.7 b$8.2b$9.0 b$10.1 b5. Governmental requirements

New Funding/Equity Grant

The funding contemplated pursuant to the Government program will be on terms consistent with those provided by the Government under existing or contemplated loan programs and contain equity enhancement opportunities to ensure that taxpayers will benefit from appreciation of shareholder value. Chrysler has a high degree of flexibility and the support of Cerberus Capital Management, L.P., to offer the Government warrants, common or preferred equity or other equity based rights.
Executive Compensation Matters

Chrysler understands the importance of limitations on compensation for senior executives during the term of the loans and will fully comply with all conditions relating to executive compensation established under the Emergency Economic Stabilization Action of 2008 ("EESA") and such other conditions as the Government may require.
Transparency/Accountability

The terms of the financing will include provisions to ensure transparency and accountability. The Company will provide regular financial information and will fully cooperate with the Government's oversight personnel.
Fuel Efficiency

Chrysler has made substantial progress in its product line to improve fuel efficiency, quality, technology and consumer appeal. Chrysler accepts all currently applicable CAFE standards as a condition to the funding. (reference charts # 46 – 49)
Early Acceleration

Chrysler agrees that the loans will be immediately callable if the Company's restructuring plan submitted to the Government on March 31, 2009 is not acceptable, or other mutually agreed upon benchmarks are not met.
6. Why the out-of-court scenario is a better option than a bankruptcy filing.

1. A "prepackaged bankruptcy" is not plausible for Chrysler because:
a. In a typical prepackaged bankruptcy, the company solicits and obtains the necessary affirmative vote in favor of a plan of reorganization of only one impaired class of creditors in advance of its bankruptcy filing and in accordance with applicable non-bankruptcy law. Once filed, the bankruptcy case can proceed expeditiously to confirmation because all other classes of creditors are either left unimpaired or have agreed to the treatment proposed in the plan.
b. Any plan of reorganization proposed by Chrysler would necessarily impair a multitude of separate classes of holders of claims and interests, making the pre- petition solicitation and acceptance or rejection of the plan (and satisfying the Bankruptcy Code's myriad conditions to plan confirmation) impracticable and highly unlikely to succeed.
2. A regular chapter 11 bankruptcy would likely not lead to a timely and successful reorganization of Chrysler because:
a. Chapter 11 cases involving companies with the scale, scope and complexity similar to Chrysler (and even companies far smaller and simpler than Chrysler) usually take several years to resolve.
b. Because the Bankruptcy Code embodies a strong Congressional preference for consensually negotiated plans of reorganization, it invariably takes a debtor-in- possession an extended period of time (often years) to negotiate the terms of a plan that are acceptable to the holders of most (if not all) classes of impaired claims and interests.
c. Chrysler would not be permitted to reject or modify unilaterally its collective bargaining agreements in a chapter 11 case. The Bankruptcy Code contains express, specific and often time-consuming requirements that must be adhered to before a Bankruptcy Judge is even authorized to rule on a debtor's application to reject a collective bargaining agreement. Even then, there can be no assurance that a Bankruptcy Judge will approve the debtor's application. Accordingly, negotiations between a debtor-employer and a Union can (and often do) take years to resolve consensually.
d. During these protracted negotiations, the employer-debtor is required to honor and pay its wage, benefit, jobs banks and other obligations under its existing collective bargaining agreements. The Bankruptcy Code simply does not provide the haven (as many believe) for employers-debtors to re-cut burdensome collective bargaining agreements in a cost efficient or timely manner. We reference the pending Delphi Automotive bankruptcy case to highlight the protracted time and significant expense that renegotiating a collective bargaining agreement imposes even during a chapter 11 process.
3. Almost every chapter 11 debtor requires debtor-in-possession (DIP) financing to maintain ordinary course business operations while it reorganizes. Chrysler would be no exception.
a. Chrysler believes that the amount of DIP financing that it would need to remain viable even during a relatively short bankruptcy (just one year) would approximate $12 to $15 billion. And, even that estimate presumes that financing remains available for the company's dealers and customers, which cannot be counted on given current market conditions.
b. If financing for its dealers is unavailable from traditional sources during its Chapter 11 process (as Chrysler must assume would be the case), then Chrysler would need at least $5 billion of additional DIP financing just to support its dealers, pushing the expected total size of the year-one DIP financing need approximately $17 to $20 billion.
c. The enormous size of the DIP financing facility that Chrysler would require is due to many factors, including: (i) the likelihood that many consumers will shun purchasing vehicles made by a manufacturer that is in chapter 11, thereby starving the company of revenue while it attempts to reorganize; (ii) the extraordinary imperiled financial state of the automotive suppliers will likely leave the Bankruptcy Court with no choice but to approve billions of dollars of payments to many of its suppliers on account of "pre-petition" claims just to keep the suppliers themselves afloat and the assembly lines moving at Chrysler; (iii) in addition, Chrysler expects that many suppliers will eliminate any trade credit during its chapter 11, thereby instantly consuming billions of additional dollars of working capital; and (iv) the incurrence by Chrysler of significant professional fees on account of the bankruptcy proceedings.
d. Given the current adverse credit markets, we would note expect DIP financing of such size would be provided by Chrysler's existing lenders or by any other private source. Accordingly, the DIP financing would have to be provided by the U.S. Government.
e. Absent the availability of such DIP financing, Chrysler would be left with no choice but to commence liquidation, the consequences of which could be dire for the overall U.S. economy including:
i. All 29 of our manufacturing facilities and 22 parts depots would be permanently shut down immediately.
ii. 53,000 out of the Company's 55,000 hourly and salaried employees would be terminated immediately representing over $7.2 billion in annual wages and healthcare benefits.
iii. No payments would be made to over $7 billion in outstanding auto parts and service supplier invoices forcing thousands of our suppliers to go out of business.
iv. Over 3,300 dealers would go out of business and over 140,000 employees at dealerships would lose their jobs.
v. Over 31 million Chrysler, Jeep and Dodge owners would lose significant value in their vehicles. Additionally, these customers would not be covered by ongoing warranties and would find replacement parts and service difficult to obtain over time.
4. Sales of new vehicles may plunge during a chapter 11 bankruptcy because:
a. Potential consumers may shun Chrysler vehicles due to perceived uncertainty regarding its financial ability to honor its vehicle warranties and due to concerns that the local dealer will itself go out of business leaving the customer without convenient access to authorized service for its vehicle.
b. Residual (resale) values of vehicles manufactured by Chrysler (both pre-petition and post-petition) would likely drop precipitously. This will further erode consumers' willingness to purchase a new vehicle from Chrysler. Also, lenders will likely reduce the amount of any financing that they might otherwise provide to potential Chrysler customers resulting in significantly higher down payments required to purchase new Chrysler vehicles. Many would-be Chrysler customers simply could not shoulder the financial burden of such significant down payment.
c. New vehicle sales will further deteriorate if Chrysler's affiliated auto finance company is unable to provide retail financing to consumers during a chapter 11. Chrysler Financial provides consumer financing for 50% of Chrysler' s U.S. retail sales.
5. In summary, Management believes that the requested $7 billion working capital bridge loan from the government is the most cost-effective, expeditious and certain means of ensuring the long-term viability of Chrysler. This request is considerably less than the $17 to $20 billion (or more) of DIP financing that Management believes would be required to sustain Chrysler for just one year in a chapter 11 (and certainly billions more of financing would be required if the Chapter 11 goes beyond one year). Moreover, without access to adequate DIP financing, Management believes that Chrysler would be forced to liquidate, which would have severe consequences to the overall U.S. economy.
7. Conclusion: Chrysler's Plan for Short-Term and Long-Term Viability

As demonstrated by the initiatives, financial projections and assumptions set forth above, Chrysler has already embarked upon, and is accelerating, a plan to overhaul its cost structure, streamline its operations, redirect its product mix to meet CAFE standards and "greener" product demands, rationalize its dealer network and partner with its supplier base and workforce to return the company to health.
Industry volumes in this plan are conservative compared to historical results. Under our viability plan, after making a $1 billion payment toward the Government loan, the Company will have approximately $12.5 in billion in cash by 2012, providing a sound basis to continue repayment of Federal loans.
To further enhance its product portfolio, support growth and improve its cost structure, Chrysler continues to aggressively pursue strategic alliances and partnerships. Further partnership, restructuring and consolidation is required for the industry to be viable in the long-run. Chrysler welcomes the opportunity to have an open discussion with the new Administration and Congress on a collaborative approach to restructuring that will ensure any Government resources invested in the industry are used efficiently and help achieve important national public policy objectives.
Accomplishing these initiatives will take time and require the cooperation of all of Chrysler's constituencies. The changes proposed are sweeping, and Chrysler recognizes they will be painful for all of the players in the industry. In light of that,
Chrysler believes that attempting to impose change by a bankruptcy filing will be less likely to garner long-term success than engaging each of the constituencies in negotiations to achieve consensus, while always bearing in mind the necessity of meeting the financial targets that will restore Chrysler to profitability. Accordingly, careful planning, information sharing and discussions with key parties are required components of Chrysler's ability to succeed in each of its initiatives.
Today we are asking you to help us bridge a chasm created by an unprecedented financial meltdown, and in doing so, preserve a critical sector of the U.S. economy. According to a research memorandum published November 4, 2008, by the Center for
Automotive Research, 4.5 million people depend on the U.S. automotive industry. This memorandum estimates the impact of a domestic auto maker failure to the overall economy, and the result is devastating: 2.3 – 3 million in lost jobs, $275-$400 billion in lost wages, and $100-$150 billion in lost Government revenue.
Without immediate bridge financing support, Chrysler's liquidity could fall below the level appropriate to ensure operations in the ordinary course. Failing to act now will hurt many American families and undermine our country's economic recovery, far outweighing the costs related to supporting an industry that touches every district in every state of the nation.
The Company is also asking you to consider investing in a company and in people that will deliver real results for the American taxpayer. Chrysler plans to emerge from the current downturn as a lean, agile company, and well positioned to begin to repay the Government loans beginning in 2012.
Management fully recognizes that this is a significant amount of money. However, the Company believes this request is the least costly alternative considering the options we face. It provides the least detrimental effect on human capital and the stimulus necessary to prevent further economic decline, if not outright economic depression.

Allpar - home of Chrysler, Plymouth, Jeep, and Dodge car, truck, and minivan information.

Ads by Google
Chrysler Crossfire - MSN
Consumer reviews of the Crossfire.
Chrysler news & advice - MSN Autos.
Chrysler.Autos.MSN.com
Aspen Car
Research and Compare the 2009
Ford Flex at Official Ford Site.
FordVehicles.com/Flex
New Chrysler In Florida
Save 35% off your monthly payment
by using 13 car buying secrets
www.CarBuyingDiscounts.com
Ask a Dodge Mechanic Now
19 Dodge Mechanics Are Online!
Ask a Question, Get an Answer ASAP.
Dodge.JustAnswer.com
2008-09 Cheap Car Deals
Dealers Reveal Their Final Price
Our Secret Formula Saves Thousands
Chrysler.SecretAutoPrice.com

2009 Chrysler, Dodge, and Jeep Cars, Minivans, and Trucks | Challenger SRT Review | V10 Challenger | Upcoming Vehicles 2010-2012 Allpar covers all Chrysler and related vehicles* and the company itself. Use the menus on top of the pages!

Cars - Engines - History - Forums - Repairs - Reviews - Other car reviews - Us - Terms of Service - News - Random - Corrections/Additions


Please read the terms of use! * Mopar, Dodge, Jeep, Chrysler, HEMI, and certain other names are trademarks of Chrysler, LLC. We are not Chrysler. We are not responsible for the consequences of actions taken based on this site and make no guarantees regarding validity or applicability of information or advice. The Webmaster is not an expert. Copyright © 1998-2000, David Zatz; copyright © 2001-2008, Allpar LLC. All rights reserved. Recommend this page!​

Home
Interactive
News
Cars
Tech/Repairs
Engines
Corporate/Bios
Brands
Shows, Meets
Other
Allpar
Search
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
153,645
Posts
1,685,216
Members
18,221
Latest member
tractor1996
Top