• 27
UPDATE: Chrysler just released the following statement: "Cerberus has not reduced or made any changes to its equity stakes in GMAC or Chrysler since the closing of either transaction. Cerberus continues to have voting control over both investments. It is common knowledge, and has been widely reported, that Cerberus made these investments side-by-side with its co-investors at the time of closing. As a general rule, Cerberus does not commit more than 5% of the capital of any of its funds to any single investment."

The Detroit Free Press is reporting via the Financial Times that Cerberus Capital Management has sold more than 50% of its stake in Chrysler LLC and GMAC LLC to a group of around 90 investors. The Freep reports that the investment firm earned up to $1 billion for selling parts of its stake in both companies. Cerberus bought a controlling stake in GM's financial unit back in April of 2006 for $14 billion and bought up Chrysler from Daimler in May of 2007 for $7.4 billion.

Automotive News actually got in touch with a senior Chrysler official today, however, who said bluntly, "Cerberus has not sold any equity in Chrysler." What may be causing the confusion is that when Cerberus bought up 80.1% of Chrysler, it had already aligned itself with co-investors. These 90 investors may have been involved in the transaction from the beginning and own a stake in Cerberus' stake of Chrysler and GMAC. The $1 billion, meanwhile, would then be what Cerberus earned in fees for bringing on the additional investors.

There's clearly a lot of confusion this morning surrounding the Financial Times report and not until Cerberus speaks will we be able to ascertain the nugget of truth amidst all the conjecture.

[Source: The Detroit Free Press, Automotive News]


I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.


    • 1 Second Ago
  • 27 Comments
      • 7 Years Ago
      Contrary to popular belief, the 300C did very in it's first few years, and even helped DCx stay profitable for two years when Mercedes sales were in the toilet. Was it a better idea than the 300N? no, not really, but it wasn't "bad" either.

      I will be very eager to see Chrysler's design direction in the next generation of vehicles when they can get away from all the M-B sourced overpriced parts.
      • 7 Years Ago
      zamafir, I think you meant the 300 and 300C, not the 300m. The m was devopled by Chrysler and introduced in 1999 as FWD model sharing parts witht the Dodge Intrepid. The 300n was supposed to be the sucessor to the m. Chrysler showed a concept vehicle at the time. It was a convertible with rear wheel drive and a Hemi motor.

      After Dumbler took over they ordered Chrysler to drop all the development on the n. Those clever Germans had a better idea: Take there aging E class platform and marry it to a concept design by Ralph Giles called the "Nassau". The result was the 300, the car you know today with it's Bently like styling. In killing the 300n, Dumbler added 1.5 years to the development time. Instead of 2005, Chrysler could have bought out the 300m replacement in mid 2003. The 300n was a sleek, modern design. The 300 based off of E-class pieces is well, different, in a rap video kinda of way. So yes, zamafir, Dumbler did mess up the 300 now that I think about it.
        • 7 Years Ago
        300c it is, thanks!
      Zac
      • 7 Years Ago
      omg. BEN***
      b/c some of us..unlike U are here for info on cars..the things we love..and their manufacterurs...and then there is ppl like u who come on to all these comment pages just to talk to someone or make a comment b/c they have NO lives.
      • 7 Years Ago
      ahhhhhh

      yugimons!!
      • 7 Years Ago
      ...and we care because....?
        • 7 Years Ago
        Sigh.

        Some of us are here for love of the automotive business, not merely cars themselves.
        • 7 Years Ago
        We care because Chrysler is a major American corporation that employs thousands of people trying to make a living and provide for their families. And we care because Chrysler is at the core of America's automotive history. It's a storied company that has make great contributions to this industry. Don't kick 'em cause they're down. There are people involved here.
        • 7 Years Ago
        Chrysler was the best in racing before you could buy wins. WWE-NASCAR banned Chrysler car because they were to fast. Today Toyota rules because they buy all air time nascar can't sell+ toyota donated est $100m to charities in nascars name!!!!!!!!!
      • 7 Years Ago
      Are any of the buyers Chinese auto companies?
        • 7 Years Ago
        I don't know but there also Indian companies like Tata and Mahindra who could be interested as well.
      • 7 Years Ago
      @ elprogramer

      I've had many people tell me stories about how they got hired in at GM/Delphi (among other places) and they are flat out told that they clock in, and take an hour break every couple hours while still clocked in. If they don't they will lose their jobs. Also stories of workers sleeping during night shift to get overtime. If you think it's alright for an assembly line worker to make over $50,000 per year without overtime, then you are a moron. That's more than twice the poverty line for working in a job that requires very little skill, just following directions.
      Chrysler was run into the toilet by the Germans, instead of focusing on how to beat the Asian imports, they tried to make the company more like a German company, which was never a good idea. The only way for Chrysler to survive in this marketplace is to start making more fuel efficient vehicles, no focus on big motors that go Vroom.....
        • 7 Years Ago
        Actually, I'd say they should do both (big motors and fuel efficient cars) if funds permit. Take Chrysler upmarket to where they used to be, as a Lincoln/Cadillac competitor. Keep Dodge in the affordable/sporty and truck segment and bring back Plymouth to cover the family and economy segment. Same recipe that worked for Mopar in the past. Diamler just didn't understand how to manage multiple brands under the same roof so we now have a mess where every brand has one of just about every product and there is no differentiation.
        • 7 Years Ago
        @BAH

        very true, couldn't have said it better myself, regrettably each of the Big 3 could learn this lesson....
      • 7 Years Ago
      Chrysler is doing quite well considering the fact that they are working to get out of a hole that Daimler dug them into. The main thing that is killing the US auto industry is the UAW, with their laziness and overpaid positions. Assembly Line workers should not make as much as college graduates...
        • 7 Years Ago
        @zamafir

        Surely not the 300M which won 1999 Motor Trend's "Car of the Year" or that made Car and Driver's 10 best list TWICE (1999/2000)!
        • 7 Years Ago
        @George, it's called sarcasm, the 300m was entirely a result of diamler.
        • 7 Years Ago
        yup, the whole 300m debacle, we all remember how Daimler screwed up royally with that model...
        • 7 Years Ago
        "Laziness".

        I'm sure you'd know that from your first-hand experience.
      • 7 Years Ago
      Now, now. We all know that nowdays gay doesn't mean happy or homosexual!
      • 7 Years Ago
      As I sat in a room one night with M. Forbes Jr., he said that investors put their money in the place(s) that they think will bring a good return on their money. Investment in US assets (companies, real estate) is an indicator that they are good investments. How much of this money goes to other countries' assets, respectively?

        • 7 Years Ago
        I would buy Chrysler stock today if they went public.
        • 7 Years Ago
        The only reason I'd buy Chrysler stock today(if it were available) is to turn my $10,000 into a $1,000 investment. Anything other than that is wishful thinking.
      • 7 Years Ago
      uuuhhh, this isnt true, i just talked to one of the big wiggs over at GMAC and he said that this is old news
      • 7 Years Ago
      Trouble.
        • 7 Years Ago
        This means trouble for the U.S., the U.S. is on sale folks, to the highest bidder, the dollar is @!#$ and we are a bargain. That goes for everything, not just car manufacturers.
    • Load More Comments