• Save
$17.4 billion financial lifeline extended to the big three united states automakers, ford, gm, and chrysler
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

$17.4 billion financial lifeline extended to the big three united states automakers, ford, gm, and chrysler

on

  • 717 views

$17.4 billion financial lifeline extended to the big three united states automakers, ford, gm, and chrysler

$17.4 billion financial lifeline extended to the big three united states automakers, ford, gm, and chrysler

Statistics

Views

Total Views
717
Views on SlideShare
717
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft Word

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    $17.4 billion financial lifeline extended to the big three united states automakers, ford, gm, and chrysler $17.4 billion financial lifeline extended to the big three united states automakers, ford, gm, and chrysler Document Transcript

    • Over the past ten years, America has had many historic moments. Withplanes flying into the World Trade Center to the election of our firstAfrican-American president, the American public has had much to beexcited about and to fear. In more recent history, the American economyhas been the main topic. From the Fall of Wall Street, crashing of thehousing market, to the fall of the American Automakers. The governmenthas stepped in to save the private market and attempt to restore life towhat was once a corner stone in America. Chrysler was one of manycompanies to be bailed out by the government during 2008. This is alook at where Chrysler started to where they are today.The Chrysler name doesn’t mean much to residents of Kenosha. Theauto plant has been called by many names since 1900, when ThomasJeffery bought a bicycle factory and started mass-producing vehicles.These vehicles had two groundbreaking innovations: steering wheelsand front-mounted engines. Historians say it was in Kenosha, not Detroitthat cars began “to look like cars.” Vehicles jokingly referred to asKenosha Cadillacs, were small, inexpensive, and sometimes, homelylooking Ramblers. (Nichols, 2009)The company originally started out as the Thomas B. Jeffery Company,then as Nash Motors, next as the Nash-Kelvinator Company, and thenthe American Motors Company (AMC). AMC partnered with the Frenchfirm Renault in the 1970s. They sold out to Chrysler in 1987. (Nichols,2009)In 1987, American Motors Company was the number four automaker.After the consolidation, Chrysler encountered a financial crisis, which ledto a restructuring of the company. In the 1990s, Chrysler came back withthe powerful Dodge Viper sports car and its jeep lineup. In 1998,Chrysler was acquired by Daimler-Benz of Germany and spent the nexteight years as a part of Daimler Chrysler. (Maynard, 2009)Daimler’s inconsistent financial results and pressure from Germanshareholders prompted them to seek a buyer in 2007. It sold thecompany to Cerberus Capital Management, an investment fund, whichinstalled Robert L. Nardelli as its chief executive. Nardelli was the formerchief executive of Home Depot. Nardelli vowed that Chrysler wouldmake a comeback as an American-owned company. Unfortunately theautomaker was battered by a sales slump as a recession took hold.(Maynard, 2009)
    • In late 2008, Chrysler joined General Motors in seeking assistance fromCongress. Congress rejected the company’s bid, forcing the Bushadministration to step in with a financial lifeline. In January 2009,Chrysler announced it had reached a tentative deal with Fiat, the Italianautomaker. In March, President Obama gave the companies 30 days toconclude the transaction. (Maynard, 2009)This culminated in a restructuring plan with Fiat taking a major role in thecompany’s management. The United Automobile Workers (UAW) andmajor lenders agreed to concessions. The Obama administration wasunable to get support from all of the bondholders for the plan. This leadto Chrysler filing for bankruptcy on April 30, 2009. (Maynard, 2009)At the end of January 2009, Chrysler secured Fiat as a partner. Fiat willshare its small-car platforms and fuel-efficient engines with Chrysler. Thedeal is supposed to give the U.S. automaker access to new markets andcheaper, more environmentally friendly technologies. Fiat is just one ofmany new partnerships Chrysler has recently formed. Hyundai buildscompact cars in Korea for the Dodge brand in Mexico while China MotorCorporation (CMC) produces the Chrysler Town & Country and cargovans for the Dodge brand in Taiwan. Developing new partnerships ispart of Chrysler’s strategy. (Fugazy, 2009)Chrysler will be hiring local retirees to help train about 85 new temporaryworkers at the Kenosha Engine Plant in 2010, a union official said.Glenn Stark, United Auto Workers Local 72 president, said the retireeswould teach new employees about machines they operated at the plant.The teaching process might take several weeks. About half theworkforce retired in May. Currently there are not enough workers to trainthe temporary employees. Hiring of temporary workers is necessary tomeet the company’s 30 percent boost in production, which starts nextmonth, Stark said. (Krerowicz, 2009)Some of the potential temporary workers were concerned that thejobless, rather than those retired, should be hired. But Stark said trainingneeded to be done by someone with expertise. “Some jobs have criticalthings, and you don’t want someone just walking in off the street to doit.” The retirees will receive the wages paid when they left. Production ofthe 2.7- and 3.5-liter engines built here should be finished by the end ofSeptember 2010. That is sooner than the December 2010 date the
    • company announced in bankruptcy papers earlier this year. It is possiblethat the timeline could change during the year. (Krerowicz, 2009)“The earlier closing might work in Kenosha’s favor,” stated Stark. Hecontinues to meet with Fiat, Chrysler’s new owner, and city officialsabout the factory’s viability. “We are still pursuing work for the plant afterit officially closes,” said Stark. Stark recently sent a message to themembership outlining Kenosha’s tumultuous 2009. “I know times aretough and morale is low, but don’t give up, give in, or lose hope,” hewrote. (Krerowicz, 2009)On top of many job cuts that took place at Chrysler, Cerberus had to cutnearly 10 percent of its staff due to the difficulties in the environment. Atthe end of 2008, Chrysler reported sales had dropped 53 percent fromyear-ago levels. Ford and General Motors posted drops in same-monthsales of 32 percent and 31 percent. Chrysler borrowed at least $12billion in fresh loans to back the Cerberus buyout, approximately $10billion in the form of two term loans due November 2013. Chrysleralready had a two billion dollar delayed-draw term loan, which maturesNovember 2014. The car company received a four billion dollar loanfrom the government. David Elsboff, a spokesperson for Chrysler,believes this will be re-paid in 2012.(Fugazy, 2009)Chrysler will return to the Super Bowl for the first time since 2004. Theywill be the first U.S. automaker to advertise at the Super Bowl in twoyears. Auto advertising has been a staple of the Super Bowl mix foryears. All three Detroit automakers pulled out in 2009 because of theauto market crash and to conserve cash. (Cawthon, 2010)The 60-second ad will air in the first half to promote the Dodge Charger.The ad may be criticized because it will cost $5.2 million. (Advertising’sbig game, 2010) The company believes it is important to have a high-profile event raise public awareness of the new Chrysler. “MostAmerican consumers do not realize we have emerged from bankruptcy,so the Super Bowl is a great way to reach out to our consumers to letthem know we are still here,” said company spokeswoman DiannaGutierrez. (Cawthon, 2010)Rudy Kuzel, a longtime worker on the line in the Kenosha plant asks: “Ifwe can’t save an engine plant that has won all the awards for quality and
    • efficiency, that has been modernized and supported by the city and thestate, that has workers who have been willing to cut their pay andbenefits and change their work rules in order to keep the work here,what auto plant are you going to save?” Kuzel served as the president ofLocal 72 in the 1980s and early 90s. “The government’s coming in,saying we have to shape these companies up and providing the moneyto do it. That’s good. That’s what we want. But if the companies use thegovernment support, the tax money, to shut factories and move the jobsout of the country, what are we saving? The company name?” (Nichols,2009)Chrysler spokesman Max Gates said the eight plants could be sold toanother company or a new business or shut down entirely. The companyplans to sell or shut the Kenosha plant in 2010, Gates said. Unionleaders and state and local political leaders reacted with outrage,particularly because the company has moved forward with plans to buildnew engines at factories in Trenton, Michigan, and Saltillo, Mexico. “Wehave been sold out by the president of the United States and his so-called car czar,” said Kenosha Alderman Patrick Juliana. It should havebeen up to them to make sure that every United States autoworker hada shot at keeping their job.” (Content, 2009)Kenosha union workers adopted concessions in 2006 to encourageChrysler to invest in Kenosha with a new, more fuel-efficient engine.Union workers in Kenosha this week agreed to more concessions,including a six-year wage freeze. Chrysler officials have previously saidplans to invest $450 million in Kenosha for a new engine line were onhold because of sharply lower industry sales. (Content, 2009)In a statement, Governor Jim Doyle called Chrysler’s plan “outrageous”and “contrary to what Chrysler has been telling us all along.” U.S.Representative Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) agreed. Ryan said in a statementthat he spoke to Chrysler executive earlier this year and as recently asWednesday evening. “I had been given assurances that this would notoccur,” Ryan said. (Content, 2009)“Chrysler plans to offer jobs at other facilities to displaced workers,”Gates said. The company is forecasting that its alliance with Fiat willcreate 5,000 new jobs nationwide. Chrysler sales in April were 48percent below a year ago, and the company already has investments in
    • other engine plants – so the disclosure about the Kenosha plant was notentirely unexpected. (Content, 2009)“If they want America to bail them out of this, they should be made inAmerica, not in Mexico,” said Kathy Gelmi, 59 of Racine as she leftTenuta’s Italian deli, a Kenosha institution. “Some of that money cameright out of the sweat and blood of the people in Kenosha,” said MichaelRosen, an economist at Milwaukee Area Technical College, who hasstudied the Chrysler assembly plant closing in Kenosha in 1988. “Theyshow no loyalty,” Rosen said of Chrysler. “They turn around and movethe engine plant to Mexico. People should really be outraged about that.If you want to know why people in this country are getting upset aboutthese bailouts, this is why.” (Content, 2009)Production of the current Dodge Viper will end in July 2010, and the carwill go out with a bang. Ralph Gilles, president and chief executive forthe Dodge brand, said there were plans to produce a limited, 500-car runof special-edition Vipers. Meanwhile, an all-new sports car is in theworks with a projected introduction date of 2012. Naturally the new carwill be done in partnership with Fiat, which also owns Alfa Romeo,Ferrari and Maserati. The death of the Viper could also herald the birthof a better sports car. (Chang, 2009)Fiat Chrysler merger officially confirmed – 35 percent initial stake. Fiatwill receive equity in Chrysler in exchange for investments in retooling aChrysler plant to make Fiat models for the U.S. (Content, 2009) The U.S.Department of Treasury has stated it will divest their portion of Chryslerto Fiat after major benchmarks have been reached. (Brown & Clowers2009)On January 16, 2010, retired Chrysler employee, William “Bill” B Finleywas interviewed to obtain an employees viewpoint of Chrysler. Bill Finleyworked ten years for Chrysler, and 25 years for American MotorsCorporation in Kenosha, Wisconsin. Finley’s 35 years of experienceincludes 30 years as a Line Forman. Finley retired on January 1, 1997.Finley was asked if his benefits have been affected when Chrysler filedfor bankruptcy. Finley explained, “When I retired I received 90 percent ofmy pay and 90 percent of my benefits that included a 20 percentdiscount on any Chrysler vehicle for me or any of my family members. Ialso received a 15 thousand dollar vehicle voucher from Chrysler as anincentive to retire before I turned 60 years old. My benefits now are
    • about half of the original dollar amount I received when I first retired. Thebenefits were cut by over 35 percent in the last year alone. The benefitcuts include retirement pay, health care coverage, and the vehiclediscount, which has been completely eliminated.” (personalcommunication, January 16, 2010).Finley spoke about his current viewpoint of Chrysler. “First of all, themanagement was taken over by the Cerberus holding company andfrom that point we were doomed. The employees and union had no sayin any type of decision. Obama and the Cerberus are to blame! Our jobsare going to Mexico and you and I are paying for this bullshit! I amthoroughly frustrated and sad! If we could have been better planners 20years ago and started looking into developing Chryslers employees intobeing more technologically advanced so we could compete with theJapanese, and other countries. I would have to say it is strange thatwhen I started in the auto industry, there wasn’t a better paying jobaround. Now that Japanese are the largest automakers in our countryand the largest employer of American autoworkers! They just know howto produce quality, economical vehicles without having huge inventoriesthat kill your carrying costs. They (Toyota) employ more Americans thanthe “Big Three” (Chrysler, General Motors, and Ford) in the UnitedStates! That is sad! They do make a good vehicle, but as I said, if wewould have focused on the future 20 years ago, we would not be in thismess. Our Union is partially responsible for this as well. The union wasmore worried about getting us more money and benefits while theJapanese were taking our market share. Giving your people theknowledge as an investment may have fixed the issue instead of strikingfor better benefits and money.” (personal communication, January 16,2010).Finley, “ As I stated earlier, our tax money is going to Mexico and youcan thank President Obama and Robert Nardelli from Cerberus for thesituation we are in today, Robert Nardelli got Home Depot in trouble andthen we hire him to screw up Chrysler! Also, our top-level union leadersdid a horrible job not seeing the writing on the wall years ago. Did weneed the large pay increases and added benefits years ago? Now lookat what we have? Very, very poor planning!” Finley’s final statementsummarizes where he believes Chrysler went wrong, “Cerberusmanagement, union greed, and government involvement, namelyPresident Obama! (personal communication, January 16, 2010)
    • The Obama Administration’s auto task force is set to report by March 31,2009, on the wisdom of continuing to bail out GM and Chrysler. Recentreports suggest that the deadline may not be D-Day for Detroit, as somehave billed it. Instead, it may be the first step in a longer-term look attroubled U.S. automakers and how much help they should get from thefederal government. The likelihood that Detroit will get more assistancegot stronger on March 19, 2009, when the Treasury Departmentreleased a plan to offer five billion dollars in rescue money to auto-partssuppliers. Meantime, a deal under consideration could give Fiat a 35percent stake in Chrysler and perhaps open the way for a largerownership position later. This is a defining moment for Chrysler. MariaBartiromo interviewed Bob Nardelli, the Chief Operating Officer hired byprivate equity owner Cerberus to turn around the struggling carmaker.(Bartiromo, 2009)The interview began with Bartiromo asking Nardelli, “How would you ratethe job the auto task force is doing?” Nardelli replies, “I certainlyunderstand the learning curve they are on, having gone through it myselfover the last 18 months. So I give them very high marks.” (Bartiromo,2009)The point men on that task force are Steve Rattner, a former journalist,private equity firm partner, and Democratic activist; and Ron Bloom, alabor-restructuring expert. Bartiromo asks, “Have they spent any timewith you, understanding the view from Chrysler’s corner office?” Nardelliexplains, “We have had two face-to-face meetings and countlessexchanges of phone calls and information. I would say those twogentlemen are totally engaged. They bring unique experience, albeitdifferent experiences, to the table, which is very helpful to ourdiscussions.” (Bartiromo, 2009)Bartiromo, “Do you truly believe that without Fiat, Chrysler has a long-term future as an independent car company?” Nardelli states,“We do. We have a viable standalone plan. And Fiat enhances theviability of that plan. Fiat brings $8 billion to $10 billion of real productadvantage. We really need to change the perception out there that Fiatis basically getting a free ride. They are bringing had technology. Theyare bringing platforms with proven reliability and durability that not onlyhave a very high market value but will leapfrog Chrysler four to five
    • years. And most important, in regards to the environment, they have thelowest-emission engine in Europe.” (Bartiromo, 2009)Bartiromo, “If the Fiat deal does not go through, is there a chance therecould be some kind of merger with GM?” Nardelli,“No. General Motors took that off the table, and I do not believe there isany opportunity to reopen that decision. I do not mean to be a brokenrecord, but if a Fiat deal does not go through, we have a viable plan. Andwe would still have the opportunity to do product alliances with Fiat likewe did with Volkswagen, Nissan, and Mitsubishi. But (the relationshipwith Fiat) would be on a much smaller scale and would not enhance ourability to pay back the government loan sooner.” (Bartiromo, 2009)Bartiromo, “How much money does Chrysler need to survive?” Nardelli,“If you will remember, when we submitted our original plan, we asked forseven billion dollars. We received four billion dollars in early January.From the time we made our original submission through February 17, wesaw unprecedented, continually downward-spiraling sales in the U.S.market. As a result, we raised our overall request from seven billiondollars to nine billion dollars—two billion of incremental dollars. If wereceive the five billion, which will take care of the financial needs of ourstandalone plan.” (Bartiromo, 2009)Bartiromo, “Chrysler is owned by Cerberus, a private equity firm. When aprivate equity outfit wins bit, it does not share its profits with theAmerican taxpayer.Why should taxpayers bail out a private equity firm that rolled the diceand is losing fast?” Nardelli,“You know, there is a lot of mystique about private equity and what it isthey do. But to a certain degree, private equity is no different than anaggregator of investors. No different than Fireman’s Fund, mutual funds,etc. They collect dollars from investors and are charged with makingthose investments with a fiduciary responsibility. I think it is unfair tomisrepresent their commitment and intention. I think there is a little bit ofpent-up frustration about private equity that is being vented in thisparticular situation.” (Bartiromo, 2009)Bartiromo, “But people say, look, Cerberus has cut deeply at Chrysler.Where is the growth strategy? How come Cerberus is not investing more
    • to improve the product line and expand overseas faster?” Nardelliresponded,“We have committed to 24 new products in the next 48 months, whichwe showed the Washington auto team. We think we will be out there in avery commanding way with multiple products, with all-electric and range-extended electric vehicles (hybrids with a small gasoline-poweredengine). Also, Fiat has what we do not have, and they are where we arenot. They have 300 dealers in Brazil; we have 30. They have a jointventure in Russia. They do not have competing products here in theU.S. And I know there is a discussion about the U.S. not beinginterested in small cars. But as the new guy on the block, I cannot letChrysler be in a position of not having products should fuel prices goback up to four dollars a gallon. We cannot get caught in that vulnerableposition.” (Bartiromo, 2009)Bartiromo, “As someone who has been at the top of other industries,what do you think was the biggest mistake the U.S. auto industrymade?” Nardelli said,“You are talking about 80 to 100 years of operation. This is a moment intime when I think we all have to face the reality that the system isbroken, that we better all come to the party in a cooperative manner andget on with developing a solution, because if we are not successful, theresult could be cataclysmic. If Chrysler does not survive, I am sure thereis not a domino effect that will plague the entire country.” (Bartiromo,2009)Bartiromo, “He begs to differ. Can Chrysler survive on its own?” Nardelli,“In a March 20 interview on Bloomberg TV, Steve Rattner, Chief adviserto the Presidential Task Force on the Auto Industry, said that from thefigures Chrysler has presented to the government, ‘there is no realsense that the company would generate meaningful cash flow on astandalone basis.’ Rattner also said the government is willing to considerChrysler’s proposal of a partnership with Fiat.’” (Bartiromo, 2009)The decline of pickup trucks and sport utility vehicle sales forced the BigThree automakers; Chrysler, Ford and General Motors; to Washington torequest federal loan guarantees. Under the condition to design morefuel-efficient, smaller vehicles and cut management cost. Thegovernment agreed to grant $25 billion in aid the Big Three vowed to
    • repay. (The auto industry bailout: When the Big Three went toWashington, 2009) Unfortunately, $25 billion wasn’t enough to help theautomakers. The Big Three leaders, including Chrysler’s Jim Press, wentto Washington for a second time requesting financial assistance tosustain what was going to be the worst reported quarter since 1983.(Kiley & Welch, 2008) Again requesting $25 billion in assistance claiming2.5 million jobs could be lost in 2009. Only 240,000 would come from theautomakers, another 800,000 from the suppliers for the automakers, andan expected 1.4 million jobs lost as a ripple effect. (Cobb, 2009) WithChrysler’s sales down 34 percent in October 2008, the country is askingif it can survive the loss of Chrysler or any of the Big Three automakers.(Kiley & Welch, 2008) The Center for Automotive Research (CAR)released a report stating, “In economic terms, the rapid termination…would reduce U.S. personal income by over $150.7 billion in the firstyear, and generate a total loss of $398.2 billion over the course of threeyears. Lost tax revenue between 2009 and 2011 would be an estimated$156.4 billion.” (Kiley & Welch, 2008)In an effort to save nearly three million jobs, the automakers claimed the$25 billion was the last hope. Despite a compelling argument for theneed to save jobs and ultimately help the economy, the Big Three failedto explain how the billions of dollars would be used. “Until they show usthe plan, we cannot show them the money,” explained House SpeakerNancy Pelosi. (The auto industry bailout: When the Big Three went toWashington, 2009) Chrysler and General Motors (GM) requested themajority of funds while Ford announced it could survive 2009 withoutassistance but requested access to nine billion dollars in loans. Chryslerrequested an emergency seven billion dollar loan to avoid bankruptcy.After failed negotiations between the US House of Representatives andUS Senate, “President Bush promised GM and Chrysler $17.4 billion inemergency loans but gave incoming president Barack Obama theauthority to demand repayment within 30 days if the companies failed toshow evidence of long-term profitability. Under the terms of the Bushplan, the companies must reduce their debt obligations, negotiate wageand benefit cuts with the auto unions, slash executive pay and sell alltheir corporate jets.” (The auto industry bailout: When the Big Threewent to Washington, 2008)After the wide spread financial crisis among the automotive industryamong other institutions, which required assistance from the TroubledAsset Relief Program (TARP). The United States Government
    • Accountability Office (GAO) took an in depth look at the best methods tomanage the investment and ultimately the best time to divest. “TheAutomotive Industry Financing Program (AIFP) was created inDecember 2008 to prevent a significant disruption of the U.S. automotiveindustry. The United States Treasury (Treasury) has determined such adisruption would pose a systemic risk to financial market stability andhave a negative effect on the US economy. The program requiresparticipating institutions to implement plans to show how they intend toachieve long term viability.” (Brown & Clowers, 2009) Chryslerparticipated in the AIFP.This is not the first time Chrysler has had to be bailed out by thegovernment. In the 1970’s, Congress created financial assistanceprograms worth over $12 billion to stabilize Chrysler and othercompanies. The government will intervene in private markets when thenational interest is at stake. There are three fundamental principles thatserve as framework for large federal financial assistance. They includeidentifying and defining the problem, determining the national interestand setting clear goals and objectives that reflect the interest, andprotecting the government’s interest. (Brown & Clowers, 2009)Identifying and defining the problem involves separating the issues thatrequire an immediate response from core challenges, which will result intaking more time. The Treasury found Chrysler had a lack of liquidity thatneeded immediate attention and provided the short term bridge loans aspart of the $17.4 billion in relief aid. It was also required of Chrysler todevelop a restructuring plan to outline how the company intended toachieve long term financial viability. (Brown & Clowers, 2009)Determining the national interest and setting clear goals and objectivesthat reflect the interest required deciding if a legislative solution or otherintervention would best serve the national interest. After determining theamount of jobs would be lost and the economic impact of the loss ofthose jobs, Congress determined it was in the best interest of the nationto provide assistance. Because large financial assistance is a significantfinancial risk to the federal government, provisions must be in place toprotect tax payers. Four provisions include the following:• “Concessions from others with a stake in the outcome.”• “Controls over management, including the authority to approvefinancial and operating plans and new major contracts, so that any
    • restructuring plans have realistic objectives and hold managementaccountable for achieving results.”• “Adequate collateral that, to the extent feasible, places the governmentin a first-lien position in order to recoup maximum amounts of taxpayerfunds.”• Compensation for risk through fees and/or equity participation, amechanism that has particularly important when programs succeed inrestoring recipients’ financial and operational health…In return for the$62 billion in restructuring loans to Chrysler and GM, Treasury received9.85 percent in equity in Chrysler, 60.8 percent equity and $2.1 billion inpreferred stock in GM, and $13.8 billion in debt obligations between thetwo companies.” (Brown & Clowers, 2009)GAO reported on challenges associated with the government takingownership in the private market. As such, there were guiding principlesfor managing its TARP investment developed by the administration.They include acting as a reluctant shareholder, not interfering in the day-to-day management decisions of a company in which it is an investor,ensuring a strong board of directors and exercising limited voting rights.(Brown & Clowers, 2009)Chrysler assumed responsibilities when accepting the TARP funds.“Chrysler agreed to produce a portion of their vehicles in the UnitedStates; report to US Treasury on events related to their pension plans;and report to Treasury monthly and quarterly financial, managerial, andoperating information. Chrysler must manufacture 40 percent of its USsales volume in the United States, or its US production volume must beat least 90 percent of its 2008 US production volume. Chrysler’sshareholders, including Treasury, have agreed Fiat’s equity stake inChrysler will increase if Chrysler meets benchmarks such as producing avehicle that achieves a fuel economy of 40 miles per gallon or producinga new engine in the United States.” (Brown & Clowers, 2009) Along withother provisions, there were major limits and stipulations to executivepay. (Brown & Clowers, 2009)While having the government regulate and hold an ownership interest inChrysler could create a conflict of interest and potentially expose thegovernment to external pressures. The GAO suggested having a truststructure manage as a third party. The trust structure could hire
    • contractors with expertise in the automotive industry and could ultimatelyoffer a plan when to divest. (Brown & Clowers, 2009)Residents will continue to question what could have been done to keepChrysler in Kenosha. Employee dedication to Chrysler apparently wasnot enough. While the outlook for Fiat appears strong, the economicimpact on Kenosha has been devestating. The plan remains to eliminatejobs at the Kenosha plant, moving them out of state and to Mexico bythe end of 2010. Kenosha residents will continue to struggle throughthese difficult times.ReferencesBartiromo, M. (2009). Bob Nardelli on the future of Chrysler with orwithout Fiat. Business Week .Cawthorn, B. (2010, January 15). Chrysler will produce Superbowl ad.Retrieved January 19, 2010, fromwww.allpar.com/news/index.php/2010/01/chrysler-will-produce-super-bowl-adChang, R.S. (2009, November 4). Chrysler’s five-year plan in six bulletpoints. New York Times.Clowers, O. W. & Brown, A.N. (2009, December 16). Troubled AssetRelief Program. pp. 1-21.Cobb, C. (2009, Febuary). A daunting challenge: the Big Threes up hillPR battle for survival. Public Relations Tatics, pp. 10-10.Content, T. (2009, May 1). Chrysler wont keep Kenosha engine plant.Journal Sential. Retrieved January 18, 2010, fromwww.jsonline.com/business/44162607.htmlFugazy, D. (2009, December 23). Retrieved January 15, 2010, fromMAJ: sourcemedia.com/J., K. (2009, December 23). Chrysler turns to retirees. Kenosha News.Retrieved January 15, 2010, from Kenosha News Online:www.kenoshanews.com/mystuff/chrysler_turns_to_retirees_7014672.html
    • Kiley, D. & Welch, D. (2008, November 7). Automakers to Washington:it’s crunch time. Business Week. Retrieved January 21, 2010, fromhttp://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/content/nov2008/db2008116_923466.htmMaynard, M. (2009, May 1). Chrysler: a short history. New York Times.Nichols, J. (2009, June 1). The case for Kenosha. The Nation.Ricciut, A. (2009, January 20). Fiat Chrysler merger officially confirmend-35 percent inital stake. Retrieved January 15, 2010, fromwww.worldcarfans.com: www.worldcarfans.com/109012016387/fiat-chrysler-merger-officiallly-confirmend---35-initial-stakeThe auto industry bailout: When the Big 3 went to Washington. (2009,March). Negotiation , pp. 7-7.