CEO: Difficult for Chrysler to survive without aid

[Yellow32]

http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/081113/bailout_nardelli.html?printer=1

AP
CEO: Difficult for Chrysler to survive without aid
Thursday November 13, 3:25 pm ET Chrysler CEO says it would be difficult for automaker to survive without federal aid

DETROIT (AP) -- Chrysler Chief Executive Bob Nardelli says his company will have a difficult time making it through the economic downturn without federal aid.


Chrysler spokeswoman Katie Hepler said Nardelli made the remark on Thursday at the Ernst & Young Strategic Growth Forum in Palm Desert, Calif.

She says Nardelli reiterated his support for federal aid to help the Detroit Three make it through the worst U.S. auto sales slump in 25 years.

Ford Motor Co., General Motors Corp. and Chrysler LLC are asking Congress for up to $50 billion in federal loans because they are running low on cash.

According to Hepler, Nardelli was asked if Chrysler could go it alone without government aid.

"It would be very difficult to make it through this unprecedented downturn," he said in response, according to Hepler.

U.S. auto industry sales are down nearly 15 percent through the first 10 months of the year because of tight credit and eroding consumer confidence due to economic worries.

October's seasonally adjusted annual sales rate dropped to 10.6 million vehicles, the lowest in more than 25 years. Chrysler's sales dropped 26 percent for the first 10 months and 35 percent in October.

 

[markbrown]

saw on tv where the guy running Chrysler got a 200 million perk package and he used to run Home Depot and he made millions there as their stock also plummeted (Nardelli's severance package was estimated at $210 million).

how do these people get these jobs i wonder? even more i wonder why the shared holders put up with it.

mb

http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/081113/bailout_nardelli.html?printer=1

AP
CEO: Difficult for Chrysler to survive without aid
Thursday November 13, 3:25 pm ET Chrysler CEO says it would be difficult for automaker to survive without federal aid

DETROIT (AP) -- Chrysler Chief Executive Bob Nardelli says his company will have a difficult time making it through the economic downturn without federal aid.

 

[Bobpantax]

If the shepard is asleep and the sheep are dumb, a quiet wolf can do quite well.

 

[JonB]

The message is glum, regardless of the messenger. HEy, TAXMAN:

CONSUMERS could help a turnaround....what about a 5% TAX CREDIT on the value of an AMERICAN CAR purchased new in 2008-2009?

The year-end tax credit would spur some buying NOW...and continue in 09

$30,000 Ram = $1500 Tax Credit
100K ACR = $5000

CONSUMERS get the break.........maybe they buy more cars?

Should be a 1-page tax-code: 51%+ US-made content or some such parameter.

It could be even simpler: REGARDLESS of new US vehicle bought, $2000 ($3000?) Tax Credit, Start NOW for 2008 tax year. Whaddya Think? Money in OUR pocket....
{Doris reminds: it worked for hybrid sales!}

 

[Chuck 98 RT/10]

The government approved nearly a trillion in bailout money. Is anyone really surprised that every CEO in the country is gonna try for a piece of it?

 

[Chuck 98 RT/10]

how do these people get these jobs i wonder?

Contacts. It's all about having the right contacts. The older I get the less and less impressed I am with bigshot executives and more impressed with hard working small businesses.

 

[slaughterj]

The government approved nearly a trillion in bailout money. Is anyone really surprised that every CEO in the country is gonna try for a piece of it?

Exactly, it's no different than the bum on the street corner - where there's money to be had, people will be there with hands held out.

 

[viperbilliam]

With those kind of salaries, you'd think the CEOs would be smart enough to guide companies through difficult times without asking for bailouts which anybody can do. Better yet, guide the company enough to where they don't get in this position.

 

[Schulmann]

All this bagging for money is ridiculous. I don't think that any of these companies deserve it.
The first thing that gouvernment should do is to send the FBI in and jail these thefts for 30 years.
Lenin and Marx didn't see communisme this way.
Even Castro wasn't so stupid to put money into failing companies.

The end of the company is the birth place of a new business.
We live in a capitalist world.
Gouvernment is meant to set rules and force companies to respect these business rules.

No matter what we say and how many tax credits we give away there is just too much production capacity available. Some of the companies have to go away. I think GM is the one that deserve the less help. Chrysler and Ford should be able to survive. It will be difficult but they will. Managers will have to play less golf and do a little over time.

Look at this like: You have a business that runs 110% perfectly and your competitors played golf and spent millions of dollars on their head office. Now they ran out of money and gouvernment will pay their debt. You know who will bankcrupt? You, the one that ran his business hard and honestly !!

This is why many analyst think that GM doesn't deserve a single dollar. GM <=> Enron !!!

I live in Boisbriand (Old Camaro city) and have seen a LOT of stupid things from GM, gouvernments and Unions being done.

 

[1TONY1]

http://forums.viperclub.org/general...0-chrysler-executive-bonuses.html#post2613785

 

[Canyon707]

These guys would steal from the poor and smile doing it. If we bail out these guys it will just line there pockets with more money. I beleive in free enterprise if you have a good product you will do well. If not oh well try again but, not on my money.

 

[GR8_ASP]

These guys would steal from the poor and smile doing it. If we bail out these guys it will just line there pockets with more money. I beleive in free enterprise if you have a good product you will do well. If not oh well try again but, not on my money.

There is a specific thread on that topic where more facts are brought to the table rather than the crowd mentality that sets in the media and here.

Is free enterprise something like Tennessee, Alabama, Kentucky, Texas, etc providing extremely low taxes to lure foreign enterprises to come. Is it to create a set of taxes and import duties around the world that inhibit American companies from competing on equal ground with other countries. Systems created by our government (federal, state and local) that give the advantage to the other guys. And then complain when the results come in. One thing is clear, we as a country do everything in our power to screw ourselves. And this is no different. Our ultimate dream is to force free market economics on veryone else while allowing our own ecoonomy to go down the toilet and watch the other economies thrive.

 

[Bobpantax]

Our ultimate dream is to force free market economics on veryone else while allowing our own ecoonomy to go down the toilet and watch the other economies thrive.

I assume the above is a bit of frustrated sarcasm - correct? But, where were the lobbyists for the Big Three when they were flush with cash and enjoyed investment grade credit ratings? It really was not that long ago. What other countries did and were doing was known to the Big Three. Where were the one page ads in the WSJ, Barrons, Business Week, etc. trumpeting the facts concerning unfair competition? With all the financial resources they had available just a few years ago, why didn't they, together with the unions, as an industry, propose legislation then addressing the issues that you raised above and elsewhere while there was still time?

 

[GR8_ASP]

Bob you are frustrating. In political threads you are against lobbyists. Here you are for them. What gives.

There are tons of lobbyists in Washington. From all sides. And since the late 1980's the environmentalist and foreign competition lobbyists far outnumber the US automotive sector in both quantity and money. For you to say now that you would prefer big lobby efforts with large advertisements in newspapers and such is BS. If that had happened you would have railed against that action.

Asking to have lobbyist drive the direction of the country is WRONG. The squeaky wheel, and a well healed one at that, should not lead us. But it has. Just look at the history of tariffs and you will see the impact of FOREIGN lobbyists. They seem to be the ones with the ears of Washington.

 

[Bobpantax]

I can be against them in certain contexts but still appreciate the reality and necessity of what they do. As does every competent corpoarte executive. In a perfect system, they shouldn't be needed but perfect systems only exist in dreams. People, including politicians, like allegedly "free stuff" including a commitment to provide campaign contributions. But we all know that there is no such thing as a free lunch. The lobbyist system is little more than legalized bribery except in those cases when the lobbyist is providing more accurate and comprehensive data to address the problem at hand and the data, and nothing else, drives the decision.

 

[GR8_ASP]

I can be against them in certain contexts but still appreciate the reality and necessity of what they do. As does every competent corpoarte executive. In a perfect system, they shouldn't be needed but perfect systems only exist in dreams. People, including politicians, like allegedly "free stuff" including a commitment to provide campaign contributions. But we all know that there is no such thing as a free lunch. The lobbyist system is little more than legalized bribery except in those cases when the lobbyist is providing more accurate and comprehensive data to address the problem at hand and the data, and nothing else, drives the decision.

What lobbyist has ever been providing the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth? NONE. They are propogandists paid to slant the data in favor of their position. Truth is NOT the objective. Achievement of deliverables is. We need lobbying reforms and not support for the current system. It ***** and the results support that it *****.

 

[GTSnake]

I've never liked lobbyists. Like Gr8ASP said they are nothing more than paid bribers. I still cannot see what benefit they provide. If they want to provide information to law makers for decison making that's fine but do it without all the gifts and perks. There should be limits just like what the pharmaceuticals did in the past few years. Unfortunately the people that need to make the changes are the ones taking the "bribes". Talk about the wolf watching the hen house.

 

[Bobpantax]

Yes. The fox has been in the hen house so long the hens don't know a bark from a cluck.

 

[Sellshomesdrivesviper]

Yes. The fox has been in the hen house so long the hens don't know a bark from a cluck.

With the collapse of the housing market, and the hens behind in their mortgage with negative equity, the fox ....

 

[viperbilliam]

Well, if the bailout doesn't come through these guys will have to start earning their pay. Oh wait - if that happens then bankrupties are going happen (this is inevitable, right?) and then reorganizations will happen - clean house and start over again. Who's running the show in these reorganizations? Maybe these guys are going to get cleaned out and someone else is going to turn the show around. That's it - that's why the current CEOs want the bailouts.