Filed under: Plants/Manufacturing, Chrysler, LLC., FIAT, India, Tata
Chrysler in negotiations with Tata, Fiat to help boost bottom line
The key to Chrysler LLC remaining as one of the Detroit automakers could turn out to be the rest of the world. Reuters reports that Chrysler has been chatting up both Tata Motors and Fiat as a means of survival. A deal with Tata might see the evergreen Jeep Wrangler being proffered in India by Tata, as well as the possibility of an electric vehicle partnership. The EV deal might be centered around an electron-motivated version of Tata's Ace, and those talks are running concurrently with whatever possible Jeep discussions are underway.
A little further west of Tata, in Italy, Fiat is reportedly considering leasing some of Chrysler's manufacturing capacity. A deal that puts business in Chrysler plants would certainly help rustle up some cash, while it would be mutually beneficial for Fiat as it contemplates a return to the North American market. Nobody is commenting officially, but we're likely to continue to see creative deals abound as everyone tries to keep their heads above water.
[Source: The Guardian]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Vintage 10:05AM (7/31/2008)
That's what Chrysler needs. Another merger.
Reply
MajorGeek 10:23AM (7/31/2008)
I think i read it as cooperating together, not merging, who knows. Fiat and Tata already already do deals together, Chrysler is looking for a 3 way.
"Chrysler, the third largest U.S. automaker, is controlled by private equity firm Cerberus Capital Management LP [CBS.UL]. Chrysler has been in discussions with Tata about arrangements to sell its Jeep Wrangler SUV in India and possibly other Asian markets, the sources said.
In addition, Chrysler has been talking to Fiat about leasing Chrysler production capacity in North America and cooperating in retail distribution in the U.S. market, the sources said."
Vintage 10:40AM (7/31/2008)
Majorgeek: People said the same thing about DaimlerChrysler. They were supposed to cooperate, share ideas, etc. Instead Chrysler was gutted and left to rot.
MemphisNET 10:45AM (7/31/2008)
I never understood the 98 merger with Daimler. Chrysler was in the black money wise, quality was coming back up, design was great, new product in the pipes
Anyway, regardless of anyone's feelings towards Chrysler or American automakers, going under would serverly cripple an already struggling economy. Hey, maybe Kirky K. will swoop in and save the day with multi-billion dollar investments.
Vintage 10:51AM (7/31/2008)
Investing money into a company run by idiots won't help. Letting it almost die so the people making stupid decisions get axed will. It sucks that a lot of good people will lose their jobs, but that's what it's going to take in order to make the bad business major/marketing douches to lose their jobs. Chrysler's totem pole doesn't make sense.
LJKelley 1:09PM (7/31/2008)
Idiots... Every US Car Maker was doing fine in 1998 and now they are all doing bad. Quit blaming Diamler for it, did they hurt Ford and GM as well?
As many people will confirm, Chrysler was still allowed alot of decisions itself and i'm sure the work methods between American and Germans were just too much different in the end.
Regardless Mercedes has been selling record numbers of it new C Class even in the US.
The problems with Chrysler are an image of unreliability, they didn't streamline to small cars enough, and honestly MB & Chrysler didn't share enough because many excutives and people were against the MB merger from the beginning and were opposed to Daimler dictating them what to do. In fact there was a lawsuit in those regards that was ruled in Daimler favour.
In retrospect it was a horrible idea, but I know I was in favour in 1998 for it but I was soon to learn how many were against and thats what caused it to fail.
FYI, I grew up with Chryslers Vans and now I drive a Mercedes C Class.
Billy C. 10:12AM (7/31/2008)
More likely they will sell off Chrysler in pieces and just shut down whatever they can't sell. Jeep is the most valuable nameplate. Probably the best buyer for the US operations is Avis.
Reply
sw 11:57AM (7/31/2008)
If it's Jeep that's going to be selling, Mahindra and Mahindra will fight tooth and nail as they've been selling jeeps since the 60's. I don't see that going to TATA
Avinash machado 10:14AM (7/31/2008)
Why would Tata want to sell the Wrangler in India when they could sell the Defender instead?
Reply
BigWill 11:12AM (7/31/2008)
They don't want to sell the Wrangler. They want to sell a Trail Rated Nano without trademark infringement issues.
And I apologize for the gratuitous Nano crack in advance.
Tim 10:15AM (7/31/2008)
This was the plan all along. I wouldn't get too excited, the deal would probably involve a huge take under with Chrysler Mexico making Fiats and no union factories operating. Cerberus with great assets such as Mervyn's and GMAC needs to dump this dog from hell.
Reply
bakka 10:31AM (7/31/2008)
It is also a quick way for Fiat to get dealers in NA. If Alfa Romeo, which is owned by Fiat, wants to return as well this would be a great deal for all involved. Tata could also be sold in NA through Mopar dealers.
Reply
Spike 10:34AM (7/31/2008)
Sell Tata the Sebring line and all that goes with it.
Reply
ken_aisin 10:46AM (7/31/2008)
Cerberus should just dump Chrysler to Tata. Tata has already bought two companies that make very unreliable vehicles (Jaguar and Range Rover). It wouldn't hurt to add a third one to the list.
Reply
Flea 10:57AM (7/31/2008)
Dang, poor Chrysler.
Oh well, more 500's for us, they never seem able to satisfy demand.
Reply
J. D. Billiford 11:00AM (7/31/2008)
>>> In many ways this is a logical move for Chrysler. All of Detroit's automakers are, or switching to, "survival mode."
And of course slumping auto sales are not just limited here to the good ol' U.S. of A. Foreign automakers are also feeling the pinch, so now seems like an excellent time for Chrysler to start forming strategic alliances with other companies.
Reply
mroverlord 11:07AM (7/31/2008)
Personally I'm getting tired of all you people crying about how bad Chrysler is and saying they make bad vehicles. Chryslers are VERY reliable. That is entirely different from being DESIRABLE. Too many people around here don't have a clue, drinking the car mag kool-aid.
Autoblog drove the 08 Dakota and liked it (other than the styling). Automobile drove the 2008 300C and was very impressed with how it has evolved since the car first came out.
Reply
AngeloD 11:51AM (7/31/2008)
This constant cheerleading for the demise of the D3 by the negatards is getting old.
Hard to understand why any genuine car hobbiest would actually want less choice in autos.
Do they think that the Japanese companies are going to pick up the slack if Chrysler goes under, and produce something like the Challenger, or 300?
The Japanese won't do that. They'll just produce even more bland, characterless, over-rated applicances.
sw 12:08PM (7/31/2008)
@AngeloD
I agree with you, even though the only affordable domestics I like are the fusion and cobalt ss; I do understand that competition improves the breed and do hope the domestics improve financially so the Europeans and Japanese don't charge an arm and a leg.
In short, if the domestics go under, expect to pay more for the imports
300Kid 12:51PM (7/31/2008)
+1, mroverlord
I've owned several Japanese and Euro cars, but only one American (Chrysler). Yeah, 10 years ago the foreign cars were outstandingly reliable, if way boring. But I think everyone has caught on that Toyota, Honda & Nissan have lost their ways a bit. Just because they were historically reliable doesn't mean they're guaranteed to stay that way. Anyway, pretty much any car you buy today will have at least adequate levels of reliability. But, to me, reliability alone isn't enough for a car guy.
I've been extremely happy with my 300M & 300 and know plenty others who love their PT Cruisers, 1st gen LHS's on down to a '92 Imperial. Yeah they had some small issues but Mercedes & Mitsubishi didn't help! Cryptic, as 10 years ago it would've been is Daimler's best interest to put money into an already strong Chrysler, especially into small cars. Also could've shared more platforms to cut costs (example put the c-class under the new Sebring like they did the e-class for the 300) instead of that Mitsubishi crap.