Chrysler Pays Off It's Loan Today - Page 2 - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

strelnik · #16 05-24-2011, 11:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by raymr

Chrysler was paying millions of dollars each day in interest alone, due the 12% rate that was part of the deal. It looks like they are coming back from the dead, but will they learn from the past? I think with less of the short-sighted American style management that got them in trouble to begin with, and no more German starvation diet, they have a pretty good shot. Marchionne is a sensible guy.

They need to fire the current board which is all made up of hangers-on from the days of Jim "let's make more cars than we can sell to hike our personal bonuses" Holden.

Like Vlad the Impaler said" Kill 'em all let God sort them out."

They ruined the company and got away with it.

Quality is laughable. A bad Ponton is more dependable.

unkl300d · #17 05-25-2011, 12:17 AM

the devil is in the details.... research the gimmicks and accounting marvels that went on like with GM !

Its all a dog and pony show and guess who pays the admission ticket !!

MS Fowler · #18 05-25-2011, 01:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by davidmash

I do not think any president or politician could have let them go under. I do not see how that could have been good for the country.

If that attitude prevails, then what is the incentive to run a company well and efficiently? If I get my golden parachute anyway, and I get demonized if i make a profit ( i.e. Exxon Mobile), and the gov. bails out the company if I run it into the ground, why even try to succeed?

t walgamuth · #19 05-25-2011, 05:10 AM

With the economy as far in the toilet as it was and $5 a gallon diesel fuel no managment would have made the companies successful. The economy was in a free fall.

Pooka · #20 05-25-2011, 02:15 PM

I have seen a lot of short term/short sighted 'management'. Sometimes you can get away with it and sometimes you cannot.

I can remember a time when I could call our air operations, order up a jet, and fly a few hundred miles for a face to face meeting with a guy when a phone call would have accomplished the same thing. I never did this but there were plenty of people that did. (I always kept my jet use down to real uses that involved a team of people going somewhere, but I did use the jets for a Mercy flight now and then that involved human life.)

But one day upper management began to wonder what would happen if our perks were slowly removed? Was the jet a tool or a toy? After two years of no jets we found management types everywhere with little to do who had been filling their time with 'important' business trips. So the management ranks were cut by about 60% and those of us that were left still found ourselves doing the same amount of work.

I think a lot of this 'important' work went on at GM, where the upper management used to joke that GM really stood for 'Got Mine!'. The company I was with made something that people needed (gasoline) and GM made something people have a lot of alternatives to. By the time GM finally got back into the emotions game it was too late and even though plenty of Got Mine people were set for life there were about 1.4 million others workers who were not. The money from Uncle Sam saved those jobs and will also keep a source of tax revenue alive for at least another 20 years.

Should the US bail out every company that is in trouble? I think it all depends on if it would be good for the US. Bush used the TARP to save AIG and some big banks but let Lehman Brothers go under. When ENRON failed no one rushed in to bail it out even though ENRON had spent a lot of time befriending folks in DC like the Vice President and Sen. Phil Graham's (R-TX) wife, Wendy, who was on the ENRON Board of Directors. In the end that did them no good.

It is all on a case by case basis, and in the case of the car companies it seems to be working out rather well. In the case of TARP.... Well, I still don't know about that one.

panZZer · #21 05-25-2011, 02:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SwampYankee

Thanks to Jeep, Durango and Ram sales.

Yes Thats all the taxpayers should have funded to keep alive. the cars---300lm is a hideious brick and all of them should be painted terra cotta colored--and no more made.

Pooka · #22 05-25-2011, 02:18 PM

Speaking of short term management.....

I was speaking to a member of the Choctaw Tribe's Council recently and he was telling me that every decision they make concerning tribal assets and investments revolves around what will be the impact seven generations from now.

That is what; 455 years?

Botnst · #23 05-25-2011, 05:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by unkl300d

the devil is in the details.... research the gimmicks and accounting marvels that went on like with GM !

Its all a dog and pony show and guess who pays the admission ticket !!

Therefore, are well-qualified to work for Congress and OMB.

barry123400 · #24 05-26-2011, 02:42 PM

There must be a surplus of money around if a series of companies will buy debt from chrysler at the present time. .

Chrysler states the interest is lower but they do not mention any special conditions. I have to wonder if the government has gauranteed the private sector loan or loans basically.

I also agree that this is generally misleading. Refinancing is basically usually no major change. sSnce I can think of thousands of places where your money would be safer something does not smell right here.

#25 05-26-2011, 04:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by barry123400

There must be a surplus of money around if a series of companies will buy debt from chrysler at the present time. .

Chrysler states the interest is lower but they do not mention any special conditions. I have to wonder if the government has gauranteed the private sector loan or loans basically.

I also agree that this is generally misleading. Refinancing is basically usually no major change. sSnce I can think of thousands of places where your money would be safer something does not smell right here.

There is definitely a surplus of capital still sitting the sidelines looking for decent investments; one of the reasons for the recent gold bubble.

dlssmith · #26 05-27-2011, 03:29 PM

The fed is guaranteeing the loans. They've been doing this for awhile now, around 100 years, and not blinking one whit when the political will (Chrysler/UAW=political will) exists. This is not a line item in the federal budget - it is direct from the fed. Print the money and ship it out. Chrysler will fail, on paper, eventually. There is too much capacity in the US auto industry and imports are minimal. If it's legal in India to sell a $3000 Tata how many $30k Chryslers will they import?

tjts1 · #27 05-27-2011, 05:39 PM

Quote:

Fiat says it will buy the US government's 6% stake in Chrysler, which will give the Italian carmaker a majority share in the US company.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-13581732

Great, now the malcontents have to find a new angle to complain about.

raymr · #28 05-27-2011, 05:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dlssmith

The fed is guaranteeing the loans. They've been doing this for awhile now, around 100 years, and not blinking one whit when the political will (Chrysler/UAW=political will) exists. This is not a line item in the federal budget - it is direct from the fed. Print the money and ship it out. Chrysler will fail, on paper, eventually. There is too much capacity in the US auto industry and imports are minimal. If it's legal in India to sell a $3000 Tata how many $30k Chryslers will they import?

There's plenty of room for 3 US producers. Germany and France each have at least three. If the quality keeps getting better, I think most people would rather buy a US make than an import for their daily transportation.