"MoPar Man" <MoPar (AT) Man (DOT) com> wrote in message
Could be, but that cherry has not yet been popped, while GM and Chrysler
lie moaning.

Some O <SO (AT) nospam (DOT) net> writes:
A very good summary, except that "poorly" is an astonishingly mild term.
--
As we enjoy great advantages from the inventions of others, we should
be glad of an opportunity to serve others by any invention of ours;
and this we should do freely and generously. (Benjamin Franklin)

In article <4ADFA7C1.7130375 (AT) Man (DOT) com>, MoPar Man <MoPar (AT) Man (DOT) com> wrote:

short term money out of them regardless of the consequences to the
company.
Cerberus did nothing for Chrysler except leave with what they could take.

Also during that time Chrysler's mid sized cars were (still are)
undesirable to many, including me.
Chrysler realizes that and here they are only advertising their trucks,
which are still desirable.

MoPar Man wrote:

Because people, businesses and governemnts are broke. That is the short
answer.

The longer answer is that the government encouraged banks to leverage
up, giving the government the latitude to set interest rates lower than
market rates.

Market rates are:

inflation + risk + costs + taxes + profit

About 3+ years ago to lend money had a negative return, tell tale sign
of a recession/depression. Debtor denial ruled. So money started
drying up. I would have to be one stupid person to lend you money if my
return was only 1%. Because inflation at the time, real inflation was
closer to 3%. And I have to pay income tax on the 1% and have costs.
Then I am assuming risk in that you will not pay me back and welch on
the debt. So if I lend you some of my money, I actually incure a value
loss. So people stopped lending money.

Then the liberal ponzi house of cards burse. As people refused to lend
money at rediculas rates, leverage went to obscene levels and just a few
bankruptcies caused the banks to crash. Careless management by
government and bankers.

But government being so far in debt to a point of dysfunction, about $12
trillion, low rates mean cheaper debt and more money to spend on
ocrruption. 1% interest on $12T is a whole lot less than 9% on $12T.
But it also comes with unemployment, tighter credit, pay as you go.

Yes, governemtn caused it, the biggest denialist debtor of them all.

Yet I am sure many a stupid will vote for the same representatives that
went for the quick ponzi scheme. Predominantly Lib-Democrats in
congress and the senate didn't do anything to stop it.

Smart companies made sure their debt was reduced going in, and are doing
quite well. But neither GM nor Chrysler were smart. Just pigs at the
trough, including the unions.

There is a credit crisis as with bad credit the USA is trying to
artificially keep interest rates below market value. At some point
either the government will go bankrupt of the currency will fail. Take
California IOUs. Prime example. But the fed can create inflationary
which they have done since at least Sept 2008 when even DC couldn't
borrow money any more.

In Canada, BC, Ontario and Quebec can't fulfill old bond issues, Ontario
has one perpetually open since Sept 2008 and can't borrow.

All because the risk-reward is far out of whack. Denialist largest
debtor number one, government, thought its statism was more important
than your job and wealth.

Joe Pfeiffer wrote:
I would agree. incompetantly and corrupt with a heavy does of dilbert
dysfunction and denial.

It kind of amazes me that the much smaller Enron fiasco sparked off SOX,
yet not one executive or board member of GM or Chrysler is being
charged. Yet GM, like Enron has had convictions on misrepresentation of
financials just like Enron.

Stinks of consiracy and corruption for sure.

Josh S wrote:

I believe that Cerberus lost a ton of money on their Chrysler investment
when all was said and done.

Josh S <Josh (AT) clean (DOT) spam> writes:

I keep reading that claim, but Cerberus owns several manufacturing
companies (Blue Bird, NABI, and several aerospace firms), and so far as
I can see from the moves those companies have made since Cerberus got
them, they seem to be trying for long-term viability.

Putting Nardelli in charge of Chrysler still seems like a major
aberration to me; does he have any manufacturing experience at all?

--
As we enjoy great advantages from the inventions of others, we should
be glad of an opportunity to serve others by any invention of ours;
and this we should do freely and generously. (Benjamin Franklin)

"Joe Pfeiffer" <pfeiffer (AT) cs (DOT) nmsu.edu> wrote in message
He did have some manufacturing experience with GE. He had a degree
in business, and took an MBA afterward ( not that that is any
positive recommendation)

He was a total washout with The Home Depot.

He was voted one of the "Worst American CEOs of All Time" one
one occasion.

'Good ol' boys dont need to know nothing...they just run the biness'

"hls" <hls (AT) nospam (DOT) nix> writes:

Ah, OK -- somehow I'd completely spaced GE. So he did have something
relevant on his resume.

After his HD fiasco, I would have thought he'd be permanently blackballed...

--
As we enjoy great advantages from the inventions of others, we should
be glad of an opportunity to serve others by any invention of ours;
and this we should do freely and generously. (Benjamin Franklin)

Josh S wrote:
them because they DON'T look like the Japanese/Korean crapmobiles. BTW,
I have a 2007 Caliber and a 1941 Windsor. Both very good cars, though I
do prefer the Fluid Drive!