Filed under: Chrysler, LLC., Ford, GM, Rumormill
NYT at it again: GM originally talked with Ford about merger
Bill Vlasic, the man who was kind enough to drop the GM/Chrysler pseudo-bombshell on us late Friday night, posted a follow-up to his remarkably unremarkable story claiming that General Motors originally had talks with Ford about a possible merger before approaching the Pentastar people.
Again, the New York Times' scribe cites two unnamed sources about the merger discussions, reporting that GM approached Ford with the proposal, only to have FoMoCo execs shoot down the idea after several meetings. The talks included GM CEO Rick Wagoner, president Frederick Henderson, Ford's executive chairman Bill Ford Jr. and chief exec Alan Mulally.
According to the NYT's shy sources, the Blue Oval boys broke off talks in September when Ford and Mulally came to the conclusion that Ford would be better off reorganizing on its own rather than being tied to another automaker.
The Detroit News got in on the action yesterday, citing another anonymous source that said, "There were never in-depth, substantive discussions that went on. It was more an expression of interest [on GM's part], as in, 'Do you want to talk?'" Ford declined.
While all these reports are great at selling dead trees (and generating page-views), it deserves noting that high-level discussions between automakers are nothing new and hardly uncommon. Recent discussions – particularly those in the cited time-frame of three or four months, when federal loans to Detroit's Big Three were on everyone's lips – are surely newsworthy, let's not forget that parts sharing, from transmissions to hybrid drivetrains, have been happening routinely over the last few years. All this leads us to believe that business between Motown's finest will continue unchanged (for better and worse) and that unbelievable headlines are exactly that.
[Sources: NYT, Detroit News]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Swede 8:35AM (10/13/2008)
GM+Ford+Chrysler next week?
Reply
Ayatollah Rodriguez 11:44AM (10/13/2008)
I read "rumors" that the reason Ford and NO to GM is because Wagoner proposed that he become the CEO of the joint company and Mullaly take the second position.
Ayatollah Rodriguez 12:05PM (10/13/2008)
Said NO, is what i wanted to write.
Biff Baxter - All Domestican 8:54AM (10/13/2008)
I'd be more shocked if they hadn't talked to one another.
At some point, everyone talks to everybody about doing something.
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.
Reply
Todd 8:56AM (10/13/2008)
GM+Ford+Chrysler = Q4 2009
...but even that is just a stop gap.
Domestic automobile production, with it toxic combination of lazy fat cat executives that play golf and still think its 1950, unionized labor ( where they guy who install the seats makes $100,000.00 a year ) and refusal to build cars people actually want, is doomed.
There is a price to pay for being xenophobic and relying on protectionism and government bailouts.
Reply
Shawn 9:01AM (10/13/2008)
NYT = Another crack head reporter writing fiction because he's too busy smoking crack to make 2 phone calls to each company.
Reply
Temple 9:11AM (10/13/2008)
This particular news regarding the Ford and GM talks were not originally from the NYT. It was first reported in the Wall Street Journal.
http://www.driive.com/2008/10/11/gm-approached-ford-about-merger-wall-street-journal/
Frank 9:17AM (10/13/2008)
Then I guess the NYT is stealing bad stories from the WSJ and still not doing their due dilligence. Modern journalism is a joke.
phoenix 12:20AM (10/14/2008)
Bill Vlasic is one of the foremost journalists covering the automotive industry. His coverage for the Detroit Free Press has been epic.
The man knows of what he speaks.
A&W 9:11AM (10/13/2008)
I can understand the economies of scale potential with these tie ups. It just seems like the cuts and reorganization it would take to make it work are too unrealistic. But then again just when you think you have seen it all, a $700 billion dollar bail out package becomes law.
Reply
Timsvtgen1 9:31AM (10/13/2008)
Good Move on Ford's Part.
Reply
stratojet 10:31AM (10/13/2008)
Any merger of this magnitude would be benificial only if they could reoranize their internal structure ad lib:
- Close Dealerships
- Drop redundant brands
- Get rid of the costly and very adverserial UAW carcan
Considering the fact that what we see in the market now is unprecedented, It may be the time for the USA officials to revisit the rule book.
The Government could be a kind of mediator (with some definite veto if no agreement is reached) to help the manufacturers and the unions reach an agreement. Other then pure cash, they can help in many ways:
- Refuse the California emission project; this will get the manufacturers way under, and fast.
-Moratory on any new safety measure for 5 years
- Resolve once and for all any old litigation (Asbestos is one that comes to mind) .
- Ban frivolous lawsuits
- Last but not least, implement very strict rules about surveys on manufacturers, especialy Consumer Reports. As you know their sampling comes only from their own subscribers, not a random sampling. Corporations must have the right to have their name and brands withdrew from Consumer Reports until this is done. Imagine a CR quality chart without Ford GM Chrysler. It would give a very different picture.
This souds farfetched but what we are going through is the consequence of all the liberal laissez-faire of the so-called free market, free enterprise, Alena, free trade and so-called free speech.
Reply
Beastage 10:34AM (10/13/2008)
I agree with everything.
Polly Prissy Pants 12:42PM (10/13/2008)
RE: "...liberal laissez-faire of the so-called free market, free enterprise, Alena, free trade and so-called free speech."
Wow, you're kinda all over the map on that one aren't you?
Sid 11:19AM (10/13/2008)
NYT is a joke. I've never seen a newspaper which was as focused on pandering to it's user-base as the NYT. It's pure conjecture and opinion.
Reply
SGV 5:12PM (10/13/2008)
Why would Ford want to merge with GM? I am glad they send GM packing. At this point GM is just dead weight and Ford is maybe, the sole domestic automaker with a realistic chance to stay afloat.
IMO, GM obsession to remain at the to (???) will cost them their dearly in the near future. Lot more than they could ever imagine. I hope they don't take Ford with them.
Reply
RLQ 7:04PM (10/13/2008)
There only might be one US auto company left in 5 years.
Reply