• 65


According to The Wall Street Journal, Cerberus Capital Management is set to shed its stake in Chrysler as part of the conditions surrounding the company's bailout arrangement with the U.S. government.

According to the article, the financial paper cites an anonymous source within the Obama administration as effectively saying that "Cerberus' equity stake no longer holds value" and "...the firm's ownership will come to an end."

According to the WSJ's sources, Cerberus will still hold on to a controlling stake in Chrysler Financial, but its stake in the automaker itself will likely be eviscerated. Such a move could make it easier for Chrysler and Fiat to come to terms on their alliance within the next 30 days (a deadline given to them by the Obama administration yesterday).

[Source: The Wall Street Journal]


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
  • 65 Comments
      • 5 Years Ago
      ""Dave, if you're going to contribute to this car discussion, then fine. If it's going to become a rush inspired political rant, then go to a politics site. We don't need this here, this is Autoblog""

      How about you spare us the James Carville inspired rant regarding Limbaugh and contribute something to this thread your own self.
      • 5 Years Ago
      I'm surprised no one has mentioned Daimler's hand in this. The Chrysler left over from DaimlerChrysler was a shell of its former Chrysler Corp self. Its billions of cash reserves from the 90's had been raided, product development slashed, foreign presence outside Canada and Mexico still rest with Daimler, not to mention the mismanagment under Daimler.

      And post complaining about Fiat taking it over are priceless I don't think they can do any worse than Daimler
      • 5 Years Ago
      Everybody bow to King Obamassiah. This is getting more and more like a banana republic every day.
        • 5 Years Ago
        @Goat Law

        Excuse me. But what part of the whole Chrysler thing don't you understand? Its not like a communist govt that comes in and says to a highly profitable company and their owners that they don't own it anymore. Let them own the company for a few more weeks without federal aid and they are dead. And THEN they wont own anything anymore.
        • 5 Years Ago
        Rush inspired? So when the president unilaterally tells a company that they no longer own what a few seconds ago they actually owned, you are fine with that. You are okay with an elected official taking property without compensation. That, comrade, is one of two things: a dictatorship or communism. In your world then, anything that is not pro-dictator or pro-communist is somehow "rush inspired." What a screwed up world we live in.
        • 5 Years Ago
        Ian B.: "Dave, if you're going to contribute to this car discussion, then fine. If it's going to become a rush inspired political rant, then go to a politics site. We don't need this here, this is Autoblog."

        Hey Ian, you might have missed it but many previously private sector enterprises - or actually, whole private sectors - used to be just that, private.

        Now, they're run/gangstered/extorted/"managed" by the government. Unfortunately, they brought their politics with them (I don't see any non-doner or non-union sectors getting bailouts).

        So, going forward, this is a Blog about Autos which are mostly (US anyway) now run by the government. It was fair and within bounds to comment/criticize the private stweardship, it is still fair and within bounds to comment/criticize the public stewardship.

        Or, are you saying we lost that too?
        • 5 Years Ago
        Another session of finger pointing and 'stalinism' (lol) accusation. Chrysler is dead, the only way for it to somehow survive is by the government putting it back on track.

        But of course you 'free market' fanatics prefer to let it die than to give the 10s of thousands of jobs a chance of survival. And you call yourself patriotic? Shame on you.
        • 5 Years Ago
        Dave, if you're going to contribute to this car discussion, then fine. If it's going to become a rush inspired political rant, then go to a politics site. We don't need this here, this is Autoblog.
        • 5 Years Ago
        Rob... You misspelled your name... think you meant R-U-S-H. Popping the prescription pills again I see.
        • 5 Years Ago
        @uppili:

        Don't be so hard on Goat Law. Goat Law only understands one kind of law: the Goat Law. Survival of those that can eat their tin cans. If they run out of teeth, let 'em die.

        Bad joke. Anyway, the argument that we're becoming "a Banana Republic" is absurd. The argument that we're becoming a dictatorship or Communist is almost as absurd. The bailout of GM and Chrysler came on taxpayer money, without which both companies would already be dead. It was done to keep people at work, not for the benefit of the ruling class. Because the American people put their money in to keep GM and Chrysler alive, the representatives the majority of the American people voted into office now get a large say in the companies, *because we have put an investment into them*. Obama was voted into office by majority vote in democratic elections, so was Congress.

        Until Obama takes absolute control of the United States government and dissolves the Congress and the Supreme Court, take your Obama dictatorship rants elsewhere.
      • 5 Years Ago
      Wow!!!!!!

      This move is effectively saying that Chrysler would have been literally gone if Cerberus didn't own them.

      It's a good thing for Chrys though. They now regain independance from a financial corp.

      Does Daimler still own 20% of Chrysler. If so, we should see an upcoming collabo with their SUV lines in a few years and a broader use of the dual-mode hybrid transmission (more models, diesel engines).
      • 5 Years Ago
      I agree. Nardelli should go. Not a good CEO. Period. Lutz should be hired again and maybe turn things around. Giles needs to stay and design good products.

      What has happened to all the car guys and gals? There not dead. Where the heck are they?
        • 5 Years Ago
        Boy AZZO, you don't know when to quit when your behind do ya? I proved you wrong on every point, except on Tom Gale's age. Yes, I was right Mercedes quality sucked. Thank you. Yes I was right Tom was an engineer as well as a designer. Pretty good qualities for a CEO I would think. Gale chose to leave because once the Germans were in control he knew there was no chance of him making it to the top, let alone being able to run design without interference. Stallkamp was outsted because he still believed it was "merger of equals", and because Chrysler started to lose money and the Germans had to have their pound of flesh (even though they already helped themselves to Chrysler's cash fund). The majority of quality issues were due to the infamous Bob Eaton (ex GM exec) who thought it was great idea to cut costs on parts against the advice of the engineers. This in particular led to the head gasket fiasco with the Neon - all to save $2 a car.

        http://www.allpar.com/neon/engineering.html

        As for SCORE and Extended Enterprise System my last post says it all. Every year they poll suppliers on their relations with OEM's. Chrysler was the number one choice during this time because they had a good two way relationship that led to long term contracts (stability). And if you knew anything about SCORE you would also know that it saved the suppliers money as well. Of course Dumbler topedoed most of it. The last time this poll was taken I heard that Chrysler scored at the bottom.

        "Dusting off" the old team is exactly what would help these guys now. Especially with their ranks decimated. At least the 'old team' knew how to make cars people wanted, bring them quickly to market, and do it for less money than the competition. You think that because it was 11 years ago that kind of experience is worthless? Come on, even you can't be that thick.
        • 5 Years Ago
        Lutz presided over many of GM's failed cars, yet many of you put him on a pedestal, why?
        • 5 Years Ago
        I hear that Rick Wagoner is available.
        • 5 Years Ago
        I knew all about Tom Gale's Engineering background... still doesn't make him a CEO. Lutz & Gale championed a RWD concept, but it took Mercedes to assist that dream. Chrysler had not made a competitive RWD car in DECADES!!!

        Mercedes' JDPower numbers were s#it & lagging behind Lexus, Audi, & BMW (you know their competitors...) The fact that they had slid down to the pole & select models dropped them below Chrysler brands is nothing to do advertise. Its a reflection of MB mismanagement.

        SCORE...an inter-company program that rewarded suppliers for cost cutting. Cost cutting that led to QUALITY ISSUES!!! 3M & select Tier 2 suppliers got OUT of the auto biz, due to Chrysler & other cost cutting demands (like SCORE) So did SCORE save them MILLIONS or cost them BILLIONS???

        Stalkamp was booted by the Germans (& I heard one reason was because he though his bosses were in Auburn Hills & not Germany...)

        Tom Gale is mid to late 60's & his son Jeff works at Chrysler (worked on the "new" Challenger program). Mr Gale was not pushed out... he CHOSE to leave

        Sorry, but dusting off Chrysler's old "All-Star" team doesn't mean the old magic will just return. 11 years is a L-O-N-G time in what is now a very turbulent auto biz. Chrysler has an aging fleet... they are the Senior Tour golfer up against a FIELD of Tiger Woods'. Forgive me (& the President) if we have our doubts about betting on the extreme long shot "pony".

        BTW, nice to be missed! :) I guess we will agree to disagree, eh?

        Fiat offers something & that deal is stalled! Will 30 days would be a tough assignment for your "Fossils". We can agree Daimler "cut & ran" + Cerberus has found the auto biz ain't what they thought.
        • 5 Years Ago
        Frank I was "wrong" on nothing... I stated my OPINION & mixed in FACTS (some that you ignored if you didn't have a witty comeback)

        Mr. Gale made his own choice to RETIRE (& rightfully enjoy a new period of his life... no more corp. fight). He is only a few years older than your buddy Stalkamp, who might have been a PR firing by Daimer... OR a guy who was DUMB enough to think it WAS a Merger of Equals!!! The Germans replaced him with their own "yes" man.

        I worked with plenty of suppliers who hated SCORE. Chrysler demanded 1st Class Quality & then insisted the supplier cut 5%, the 5% MORE, then 15%. I saw parts that the imports purchased from the same supplier... better quality because they didn't cut every ounce of quality OUT. To be fair I also saw select "SCORE" style cheap parts for profitable Japanese companies too.

        My sources come from more than one site or fan-boys that drank the corporate Kool-Aid. I was sad to see Chrysler "WOW" the public with ground breaking stuff like minivans, cab forward architecture, bold exterior styling & then stuff 'em with K-Mart interiors (with plenty of"SCORE'd" supplier parts) & think the customers would smile & consider the product "World Class". The public has spoken.

        You keep clinging to your Fossil List... I will have faith in a new era of people to save Chrysler. ONE era doesn't have ALL the answers, can't solve all the NEW problems. The Fossils are NOT coming either (thats FACT not opinion...). Pray for the young team to work a merger. Ralph Gilles is your new Tom Gale... too bad Chrysler needs MORE than a Design leader!
        • 5 Years Ago
        I give you facts backed up by references. You give opinions with a retorical flourish. Whatever floats your boat I guess.

        I don't even know where you get off comparing Chrysler interiors of the 90's with the crap that Dumbler foisted on them in the 2000-2007 period. I have sat in 300M and a 300c and Charger. No comparison.

        I don't know how you pooh-pooh the real gains that Chrysler made in it's development methodolgy in the 90's (thanks to a study they did of Honda I might add). To give you an idea of how much it affected development for the good, the all-new Neon cost about as much, including the design of a completely new engine and manual transmission, as the creation of the Sundance/Shadow, which coupled a Daytona suspension to a shortened Acclaim. And if you know Chrysler products like you claim, you know the Sundance/Shadow had no new engine or transmission.

        As for SCORE, I never said it was perfect, but history has spoken (just google SCORE and Stallkamp), and they say it was MUCH more good than bad. The supplier poll didn't
        lie. Yes they had to cut costs. So did everybody. It hasn't changed till this day.

        I am astounded that after being confronted with FACTS backed up by references you continue along the Path of Cluelessness, which is right next to the Forest of Stupidity and a 9-iron away from the Sea of Naivete. But I can't say it hasn't been fun! At least those who read this thread will learn about what Chrysler was like before Dumbler got their hands on it.
        • 5 Years Ago
        Frank: What's with your Fossil List??? Iacocca is 85! Tom Gale was a DESIGN VP not a CEO. If Francois, & Stallkamp were so GREAT before why was Chrysler quality so bad during their runs @ the pre Daimler Chrysler?

        In the 90s leasing was king so quality issues popped up when many turned in their car or truck. The people BUYING Chryslers knew & moved to other brands.

        New faces, young & up incoming business people working in the business can be the new Iacocca or Lutz for Fiat-Chrysler. They will HAVE to be... the old guard are retired
        • 5 Years Ago
        Hey Azzo,

        Boy I miss our retorical matches! Glad you are back. So here goes:

        "Frank: What's with your Fossil List??? Iacocca is 85! "
        Like I said, an oversight committee. Not operative control. You know, the Japanese respect the wisdom of their elders. Maybe we could learn something from them. The others on the list are not that old.

        "Tom Gale was a DESIGN VP not a CEO."
        Here is where your lack of knowledge shows. Tom Gale started as an engineer, then later moved to design. Also while at Chrysler (the good Chrysler of the 90's) he was also the head of the large car and Minivan platform team. It was he who made the rwd 300 a reality. Read the MT interview with him. The car was in development when the Dumbler blitzkrieg arrived in Auburn Hills.

        "If Francois, & Stallkamp were so GREAT before why was Chrysler quality so bad during their runs @ the pre Daimler Chrysler?"
        Chrysler reliability was superior to Mercedes at the time Dumbler "merged" with them. According to the latest JD Powers, it still is. If you mean quality as in materials, well if Chrysler sold a bunch of cars for $50-150,000 then yes they could have the same quality, but that's not the kind of auto company they are.
        Under Stallkamp Chrysler was rated no. 1 by suppliers as the best automaker to make parts for. His SCORE (Supplier Cost Reduction Effort) program and Extended Enterprise System saved Chrysler BILLIONS.
        http://www.allpar.com/corporate/score.html
        http://www.allpar.com/history/extended-enterprise.html

        "the old guard are retired"
        Stallkamp for one is only 62 years old and is on the board of Borg Warner Inc.

        Always a pleasure! :-)
        • 5 Years Ago
        Azzo, I forgot to mention that Tom Gale (the best CEO Chrylser never had imo) is in his late 50's or early 60's. I mean, it was only 11 years ago that Chrysler was an independent company. You make it sound like it was ancient history.
        • 5 Years Ago
        Bob Lutz is 77 years old & is retiring from GM by choice... not being pushed. WTH would he want the Chrysler headache at his age Steve?

        Ralph Gilles will stay if will be allowed to establish a creative vision... if there is NOT, then his talents will be appreciated at a new company.
        • 5 Years Ago
        Well, there certainly is a good list of candidates to bring out of retirement (or semi-retirement). how about Tom Gale? Thomas Stallkamp? Dennis Pawley? Francois Castaing? (Hope I got the spelling right). And yes, Bob Lutz. Even Lido. Now these guys don't have to have an 8-5 job with Chrysler. But they would make a good "oversight" committee to help the execs there now.
      • 5 Years Ago
      Who owns Chrysler now?
        • 5 Years Ago
        Jacob, Cerberus still "owns" Chrysler, but Chrysler is technically bankrupt. What the company owes in debt, commitments to employees and other liabilities far exceeds the assets the company has including the Cerberus's original investment.

        When the company is liquidated if there is any money left after everyone is paid off, including the government, Cerberus would get that. Then they can go to Dunkin's and get a coffee and perhaps a donut.
      • 5 Years Ago
      I admire Ford's civility during this whole charade.
      They're essentially competing with a company (GM) that should have faced the consequences of it's poor decisions but instead they are unfairly competing with a taxpayer funded monstrosity whose government is awarding(in the democratic tradition)sloth and mediocrity.
      Our country should reward people who strive for excellence.Not a bunch under performing do-nothings with a culture of entitlement.
      Obama is a socialist.Wake up.
        • 5 Years Ago
        @DKB
        My overall point is socialism is not the answer.
        Socialism rewards mediocrity.
        • 5 Years Ago
        "...government is awarding(in the democratic tradition)sloth and mediocrity."

        If the government is REwarding mediocrity, at this point it's to stabilize the employment, healthcare and pension prospects in this entire sector of the market. It's hardly a problem unique to the democratic party, since the Republicans threw money at private companies (often via no-bid contracts) like it was confetti in a parade.

        It is myopic and destructive to look at this financial collapse from a partisan perspective. Politicians and administrations from both sides of the aisle did their part to give our treasury to the wealthy an influential, and to perpetuate a financial system that rewards the connected regardless of whether they do anything beneficial for their companies. Under Cheney..er... Bush, you just wouldn't have seen how much money was flowing to these wounded companies, and no one would have been sent down because everyone was doing a "heckuva job Brownie."
      • 5 Years Ago
      Good. They haven't done anything ''wrong'' -- but they haven't done anything positive either. Well, wrong would be hiring Nardelli I suppose.

      I really hope Chrysler can pull this off, they were doing so well in pre-merger with Mercedes - and have no doubt that they wouldn't be in this mess today had it not gone through.

        • 5 Years Ago
        Azzo - yes, all the car companies were doing well in the 90's but Chrysler was doing the best. The most profitable, the fastest to market with new products. It wasn't just because times wre good. It was because Chrysler had leaders with a vision then. Then Dumbler came calling and as Paul Harvey says now you know the rest of the story.
        • 5 Years Ago
        Azzo,

        Profits on the Neon: read http://www.allpar.com/neon/engineering.html

        come back here when you learned something and can actually contribute to the discussion.

        Corporate profits are a matter of public record, not opinion. I can't fix stupid, you are going to have to do that yourself.
        • 5 Years Ago
        That's nice Frankie... I'm not an engineer, so I'm real hurt that I will not be able to hold other's engineering jock. You think you bring FACTS, but spout "facts" from select fan-boy sites... its ONE point of view!!!

        I was being nice to the Escort. I heard $$$ loser or slight profit. That car's numbers & parts sharing made it ZERO & the Neon is a winner in what? Two years? I TOLD you why I don't sip the Kool-Aid on the PL..... specifically...

        .... RECALLS & WARRANTY costs! Incurred by Chrysler that came onto the books in the NEXT model year(s). IMO, that's creative book keeping(@ its finest). WEEEEE! we made 2K per car profit (OHHH, because we deduct the "losses" the next fiscal year).


        I'm also well aware of Chrysler's November 2008 buyouts... asked for 25% EVERYWHERE & got almost 40%!!! Add the older men & women that already had bailed... yes they have a lot of missing engineers, designers, marketing, etc! Whole departments are GONE!!!

        I will have to re-read your fan-boy article... I say "re-read" because I think I've seen this. Bring back the old tooling on the PL??? Yeah, because the Neon was such high quality & secured so many loyal customers to Chrysler the 1st time around, eh?... You just keep givin' on this April Fools Day dude!!!

        Remember, I said I OWNED 3 Neons in my car history. Chrysler builds good trucks & SUVs The LX cars are sweet... with interiors that are crap-tastic plastic nightmares, but nice riding/ handling models. SMALL cars? Chrysler small cars SUCK A$$. I'm not picking on Chrysler... Ford & GM's early 2000 era small cars SUCKED as well.

        Problem for Chrysler? Ford & GM have had some R&D & popped out NEW small car designs... Chrysler is PRAYING Fiat can get them relevant SMALL CARS. They were working with Nissan, but this economic horror show had hit Renault-Nissan too.

        Will "fan-boys" like you drive a Nissan or Fiat "CHRYSLER"??? BTW, Frank... never SAID Chrysler's problems were ALL self-inflicted ... thats YOU adding drama & putting words into my mouth (figuratively of course).

        We agree to disagree. Many of my friends chose to not drink the Kool-Aid any longer... they possessed more "inside" stuff than you & I , yet took the buy-out & a chance to start over. WHY? I think even you can figure it out.

        Guys that left BEFORE November'08... some were at Chrysler in the 70's dark days. Surrived 1973, 1979, 1980, scared in 1989... This era scared the H*LL out of them... its bleek & they are PI$$ED- OFF & are sick they gagged on the Kool-Aid over the years. Will Fiat pay their pensions now???...

        ...UGH!!! That's another story that we won't agree on. April 1st is suppose to be $h*ts ^& Giggles, so I'm done on AB until tomorrow.
        • 5 Years Ago
        Frank: What's "stupid" is to keep sourcing some Mopar Fan-boy website. You have ONE opinion on things. That article looks like an ex- engineer that recalls what his bosses told him.

        I heard the same "pure profit" on the PL from some co workers, friends + family, & I also heard what I wrote!!! If Chrysler & their team pulled off all the magic you have stated the company would have a solid base to REBOUND! Perhaps they would not be in the dumper they were in BEFORE this economic disaster.

        As for "corporate profits are public record..." YEAH, so were Enron's & World Com's. Mercedes reviewed those "public records" too. Ford also had "public records" & they showed the Escort took a helluva long time to make a profit. Ford sold a helluva lot more Escorts than Chrysler sold Neons. Chrysler wasn't the only company with a SCORE like program!!!

        Dismiss the warranty costs "EFFECTING "PROFITS" all you want Frank... Chrysler's creative bookkeeping were still fairy tales. Daimler told the world Chrysler was the strongest of the Big 3 & about 15 months later the Car Banks were discovered & DCX wore egg on their faces!!!

        Frank, you would be a perfect Chrysler accountant (you'd believe all the corporate B.S.). Don't believe ONE source... you end up looking like that Iraq Information Officer.... "NO! The Americans have not advanced!!! Saddam is brilliant & still in control... the Americans have been DEFEATED!!!

        Thanks for the April Fool's humor from you... a laugh is a laugh!!!
        • 5 Years Ago
        "That article looks like an ex- engineer that recalls what his bosses told him."

        I have corresponded with Bob Sheaves. He has more engineering talent and insight in his left pinky than you have in your entire body.

        "If Chrysler & their team pulled off all the magic you have stated the company would have a solid base to REBOUND!"

        If you read the article you would have noticed the sub-heading "and why Chrysler can’t do it in 2008". It mentions that they no longer have the staff or the knowledge base pre-"merger of equals". Not to mention money. If you think that Chrysler's current troubles were theirs and only their doing, you are beyond clueless.

        If you don't want to believe P&L statements because 2 out of thousands of corporations cooked their books go ahead. Of course, whenever you enter Conspiracy World, every objection has an equal and opposite explanation.
        • 5 Years Ago
        That was the mid 90's... What car company was doing BAD??? Answer: None!

        Chrysler was making beautiful looking cars with the same POS quality they still have. Sure they have one or two exceptions, but in general the public has spoke...

        ... & they treat Chrysler brands like a sale @ Wal*Mart or the Blue Light Special.
        • 5 Years Ago
        P.S. The Ford escort never made money. Every one was built at a loss AFAIK. The Neon was designed from the beginning to be profitable. Chrysler was considering purchasing a new small car from Mitsubishi, but the execs were persuaded to let it be tried in-house. The one overall requirement was that it had to make money. Chrysler was too small to make a car that didn't generate a profit like Ford or GM. The story of how the Neon was approved and Chrysler's implementation of a Honda style development methodolgy is covered in the book "Comeback" by Paul Ingrassia and Joseph B. White.
        • 5 Years Ago
        Frank: Chrysler was the "most profitable" of the Big 3. Also, some of that is hard to gauge. Your last mane isn't Klegon is it??? :) :) :)

        Example? Chrysler bragged they made a PROFIT on the Neon. $1,500-$2,000 a car, pure profit. This was 2-3 years after it debuted..... HMMMMM Ford built the Escort as their"world" small car & it took a DECADE before they claimed black ink as opposed to red.

        Ask any dealer about warranty costs on a Neon (idea). I had three Neons & ALL of my cars had the same transmission/ clutch issue. The DOHC engine was such a POS that when the 2nd Gen. Neon debuted Chrysler had eliminated that motor to focus on the "better engineered" version.

        You can't tell me Chrysler made the $$$ they claimed on the Neon... so I question their books (& released figures). Obviously so does Daimler... Chrysler looked like a good partnership for them in late '97.

        The same Chrysler book keeping counted sales & forgot that sales were made with HUGE discounts, rebates & 0% Financing. Also killing residuals on lease rates & sinking re-sale value on used Chrysler product.

        If that's their stellar past... perhaps why that won't be a future?
      • 5 Years Ago
      Niceee
      • 5 Years Ago
      Here's my take on all of this.

      The loans should be given, with the appropriate legal guidelines like any business loan.

      Then, the loan has to be paid back. Simple.

      Now, do we really think everybody in America is going to buy and drive cars like the new Honda Insight and Toyota's Prius? NO!

      Let the automakers figure all this out and then let the profits come back. Government does not belong in the boardroom and should stay out.

      Chrysler paid back those loans early when they got them in the 1980s. They can do it now. Fiat is interested in Chrysler and that could be a good thing as well.

      This whole economy is a mess and it will take some time to get back into the black again.

        • 5 Years Ago
        True. Times were different, but, leadership was important then and it needs to be now.

        Numbers don't mean a thing. Nardelli is not a car guy. That's my point. You have CEOs who only know numbers and not products.

        Houston, we have a problem!!!
      • 5 Years Ago
      viper GTS-R

      You just don't understand do you? Chrysler is dead, 100% dead, there is no way in hell it will survive without government help. In other words, if you don't want "government to get ahold" of it, then the alternative is the disappearance of all of it.

      How many buyers are there for Challenger, Charger, Viper and SRTs? These are a small % of overall sales, how do you expect a company to survive with that kind of products, that's a laughable idea.

      Your lamentation about oil is ridiculous, what's fun about sending $700bn a year to the Middle-East? What's fun about Oil Wars? What's fun about environmental destruction, oil spills? What's fun about breathing filthy air that kills 10s of thousand Americans every year? Just because some selfish pr*ck can have fun in his over-powered ride?
      • 5 Years Ago
      I call BS. Cerberus will eviscerate and sell off the carcass before they go along with this.
      So would I.

    • Load More Comments
    Advertisement

    From Our Partners

    2014 Jeep Cherokee
    MSRP: $22,995 - $30,095
    2015 Mercedes-Benz E-Class
    MSRP: $51,800 - $103,200
    2014 Chevrolet Cruze
    MSRP: $17,520 - $24,985