General Motors And Chrysler Discuss Merger

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS

TOM KRISHER | October 11, 2008 09:35 PM EST | AP

Compare other versions »

In this Aug. 17, 2008 file photo, an unsold 2008 Sierra pickup truck sits under the sign at a GMC Truck dealership in the south Denver suburb of Littleton, Colo. General Motors Corp. shares on Thursday, Oct. 9, 2008, plunged to their lowest level since the opening months of the Korean War, as investors continued to fret that the decline in U.S. vehicle sales may be spreading to the rest of the world. (AP Photo/David Zalubowski, file)

DETROIT — For General Motors Corp. to acquire Chrysler LLC and all of its warts, GM would have to get desperately needed cash as part of the deal. Lots of it, according to industry analysts.

With both automakers struggling to survive amid slumping sales, a slowing global economy and an unprecedented credit crunch, it's unclear whether Chrysler's majority owner, Cerberus Capital Management LP, would be willing to pay up, or whether the federal government might even get involved to save one or both struggling automakers.

"There's got to be more in it for GM than just Chrysler," said Erich Merkle, an auto industry analyst with Crowe Horwath LLP, an accounting and consulting firm. "If you put two auto companies together, both that are losing money, both that are losing market share, you've just got an auto company that's losing market share faster and losing more money."

GM and Cerberus, which owns 80.1 percent of Chrysler, have held preliminary talks about an acquisition or other combination of the two automakers, according to a person familiar with the discussions who did not want to be identified because the talks have not been made public.

A tie-up between the automotive giants would be historic for the industry and solidify GM's position as the global sales leader, which it has been in danger of losing to Toyota Motor Corp. GM and Toyota finished 2007 essentially even in vehicles sold worldwide.

GM and Chrysler already have a joint venture with BMW AG making a hybrid gas-electric powertrain. While melding the companies could save money by combining management, engineering, manufacturing and administrative staffs, analysts say consolidation would bring more costs, and the rewards probably wouldn't come for several years.

That might be too late for both automakers.

Auburn Hills-based Chrysler, a privately held company, doesn't have to open its books, but it lost at least $510 million in the first quarter and $1.6 billion last year. Its sales are down 25 percent so far this year, the worst drop of any major automaker.

Story continues below
advertisement

Detroit-based GM is burning up more than $1 billion in cash per month, with several analysts predicting it will reach its minimum operating cash level of $14 billion sometime next year. Sales are down 18 percent, and the company has lost $57.5 billion in the past 18 months, largely because of tax accounting changes.

All of this comes as U.S. sales have slowed to their lowest point in 15 years, making bankruptcy possible for all of the cash-strapped Detroit Three if things don't turn around soon enough.

Not exactly the prime scenario for a GM-Chrysler combination, said analyst Kevin Tynan of New York-based Argus Research Corp.

"Even though you're getting the rationalization of folding the two businesses together, it doesn't make sense at this time," he said. "There's got to be some sort of outside motivation for them to do that sort of deal, especially in this market."

That outside motive, analysts speculated, could be the federal government, which would inherit massive pension liabilities if either company went under.

In exchange for taking on Chrysler, analysts envisioned that GM could be given access to low-rate emergency borrowing from the Federal Reserve's discount window, used in normal times by banks.

GM, though, said it is not going to the Fed at present.

"We're not actively pursuing anything at this time," said Greg Martin, GM's Washington spokesman.

The Wall Street Journal reported late Friday that Cerberus might trade Chrysler for GM's 49 percent stake in GMAC Financial Services. Cerberus bought 51 percent of GM's former financial arm for $14 billion in 2006, but since then GMAC has suffered because of bad mortgage loans.

GMAC could look good to Cerberus now, Merkle said, because its insurance and auto businesses are profitable, and the federal government may take on its bad mortgages through the $700 billion financial bailout plan approved earlier this month.

If a merger were to go through, GM could move quickly to cut costs and save billions, said Van Conway, a mergers and acquisitions expert and partner with Birmingham, Mich.-based Conway & MacKenzie. The company would have to calculate whether it has enough cash to stay alive and fund the deal, he said.

If the numbers work, a lean, merged automaker would be in a strong position to make money once the U.S. market recovers and people start buying vehicles again, Conway said.

"You want to be the last man standing here because the car market is going to come back," he said.

Tynan estimated GM could save more than $5 billion a year by running the two companies as one, but said it could take years to realize the savings.

"Over the short term there's very little in the way of consolidation that could occur," said Michael Robinet, vice president of global forecast services for CSM Worldwide, an auto industry consulting company based in Northville, Mich.

Renault and Nissan are still completing their consolidation, even though the companies joined in 1999, he said.

A combined GM-Chrysler would have too much factory capacity, too many brands and too many dealers, the analysts said.

"Adding three more brands (Chrysler, Dodge and Jeep) to their mix and another company that's very heavy in the area of truck production and sales, I don't know how that can be a good thing," Merkle said.

Neither GM nor Chrysler would confirm that they've talked, but each said discussions between automakers are routine. There also were reports Saturday that Chrysler was in talks with Nissan-Renault, and The New York Times reported that GM had approached Ford Motor Co. about a merger earlier in the year, but Ford wanted to stay independent.

Merger talk among the Detroit Three is not new. GM talked with DaimlerChrysler AG in 2007 about acquiring Chrysler before Cerberus bought its stake in a $7.4 billion deal. The talks fell through when GM decided it should concentrate on cost savings and efficiencies by globalizing its own operations.

Cerberus and Daimler confirmed last month that they are in talks for the private equity firm to acquire Daimler's remaining 19.9 percent Chrysler stake.

The Journal said the talks between GM and Chrysler are on hold for now due to recent turmoil in the financial markets.

The auto industry has been hit hard in recent weeks by the effects of the credit crisis, prompting GM and Ford to issue statements Friday to dispel the notion that they might be headed for bankruptcy.

GM and Ford shares were battered with the rest of the stock market this week, falling to lows not seen in decades. GM shares lost about half of their already-depressed value during the week, closing at $4.89 on Friday. Ford shares fell similarly, ending the week at $1.99.

___

Associated Press Writer Ken Thomas in Washington contributed to this report.

DETROIT — For General Motors Corp. to acquire Chrysler LLC and all of its warts, GM would have to get desperately needed cash as part of the deal. Lots of it, according to industry analysts. Wi...
DETROIT — For General Motors Corp. to acquire Chrysler LLC and all of its warts, GM would have to get desperately needed cash as part of the deal. Lots of it, according to industry analysts. Wi...
 
Comments
132
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 Next › Last » (5 pages total)
- JBS I'm a Fan of JBS permalink
photo

Been giving this a little thought, and it appears what GM is really after is Jeep. Given the history of the companies that have owned Jeep, I wonder if that's such a good idea.

Anyone remember Willys, Kaiser, AMC? Where are those former owners of the Jeep marque today?

... and now Chrysler.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:24 PM on 10/12/2008


Unless I get a better mileage, better made car with fewer repairs, better trade-in value, I will continue to buy buy Japanese Toyota. My parents have stopped buying US made cars for the last 20 years, and I have not own any GM or Chrysler car since then. My first car, Toyota Highlander for 8 years, and traded it with a brand new Hybrid 4Runner. The trade-in value was fantastic, and my new Hybrid gets fantastic gas mileage. My parents also bought a Toyota Sequoia, and my siblings followed suit.


GM SUV models gets 6 miles to a gallon ? And what's up with the stupid Hummer ? I always suspected that GM and Chrysler were, and is in bed with the BIG OIL thugs.

Birds of the same feather !

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:21 PM on 10/12/2008

Either way, GM ABSOLUTELY needs to
1) close 20-30% of the plants
2) close all product lines except top 3-5 maybe. the word doesnt need 10 brands from one automaker, whoever be that may.
3) restructure, employee buyouts. shed workforce by at least 30%.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:47 AM on 10/12/2008

GM absolutely needs to close. I agree.

:-)

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:02 AM on 10/12/2008

True, but you are a used Toyota salesperson with zero credibility who thinks spending $25,000 on a nToyota to save $1000 per year in guess gives you an 8% "return" (guffaw).
.


I agree.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:29 AM on 10/13/2008

So many lost jobs...very sad.

Steven Wevodau

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:48 PM on 10/11/2008
photo

Why don't they just let one of these automobiles fall to the ground already?! No one wants to buy anymore of their junk and the car companies have no one to blame but themselves. Even though GM and perhaps Chrysler are making claims to invest in making more energy efficient automobiles, the sub par culture of merely cutting costs (cheaper labor, cheaper materials, refusal for tighter mpg standards) is too entrenched in the back of their minds. The problem is the fact that you have too many captains running the ship and they haven't tried to keep up with the market let alone advancing the technology in terms of manufacturing or design and development. What we need in the US is for companies to be run by people who ACTUALLY understands the product or service they are producing. For instance, more Engineers need to be CEO's or directors -- not just project managers in the auto-industry, energy, and info-tech sector. Retired physicians should be more involved in health insurance in assessing the real costs of healthcare. I have nothing personal against business majors and business executives -- but for some reason the engineering profession has been treated as nothing more than a commodity (one case in point is Boeing). Therefore, I don't see how Chrysler or GM are going to rise out of the ashes when they showed their disregard for the company by rewarding themselves with outrageous salaries but little investment towards research and development.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:43 PM on 10/11/2008
- JBS I'm a Fan of JBS permalink
photo

One of the deals that was made when companies shifted from defined benefit pensions (20 years gets you a gold watch and lifelong retired pay and health care) to 401K plans was the Federal Government set up a Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation similar to the FDIC that insures bank deposits.

Basically, if either of these companies crashes to the ground, the U.S. Treasury (i.e. the taxpayers) has to make good on all those pension benefits.

BTW, while they were gutting pension benefits for new workers and shifting the burden of those old pensions onto the Federal Government, the executives still continued to award themselves defined benefit pensions; no 401K worries for CEOs.

Did you know, for instance, that Chaney still draws over a million dollars a year in "deferred compensation" from Halliburton?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:31 AM on 10/12/2008
photo

Perhaps now Nissan will make a more attractive offer, one with (some) real cash.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:44 PM on 10/11/2008

I don't see the upside for Chrysler. A better merger option for Chrysler would be Nissan-Renault as the 2 companies are more complementary. Chrysler is already working with Nissan on shared truck and car production so why not move the discussion to a merger?

GM needs to focus on bringing their European models to the US asap. In the meantime, close down cut production of slow selling brands to re-tool factories for the Euro models and sell of the brands that are a millstone (Hummer, Saab). The Volt is getting favorable press but it is a limited production vehicle that won't make much impact on the GM bottom line.

Ford needs to follow this lead from GM in bringing their Euro models to the States and shedding non-performing brands (e.g Mercury). Getting a Taurus-like vehicle (the old Taurus not a re-branded Five Hundred) out the door with excellent quality and 35+ mpg would be a winner.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:14 PM on 10/11/2008

Nobody but absolutely nobody needs Chrysler. This is simply a move by GM management to project that they are "working" to stop the almost inevitable bankruptcy. If you still own GM stock, this is the time to get out. Although, at $2/share it makes no difference, you lost almost all of your money, already. The remaining value is that of a penny stock.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:27 PM on 10/11/2008
photo

GM probably wants Jeep, which is the only profitable division of Chrysler. Jeep owners tend to be very brand loyal.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:52 AM on 10/12/2008
- JBS I'm a Fan of JBS permalink
photo

Maybe Chrysler is leery of teaming up with another foreign auto company after Daimler kicked them to the curb.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:33 AM on 10/12/2008

Maybe they'll combine the Hummer with the Viper to make the stupidest vehicle in history.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:29 PM on 10/11/2008

Why are my post being deleted.....
Why are my post being deleted....
Why are my post being deleted....

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:13 PM on 10/11/2008

You know, the greedy and corporatists have used this economic crisis to do one thing. It's called mergers and aquistions mania. At this rate, we'll have one bank, one savings and loan, one car manufacturer, and of course one Wal-Mart. Time for enforcing the Sherman Anti-Trust Act.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:09 PM on 10/11/2008

I forgot something: If it's too big to fail; it's too big.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:11 PM on 10/11/2008

McCain Cops Out On Social Security

http://tinyurl.com/3erj5y

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:55 PM on 10/11/2008

the car industry is going to come back some day? really? who's going to buy the cars? unemployed people? maybe if I had a good paying job in a car plant I could afford one. I did once but they closed it.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:42 PM on 10/11/2008

they thought they could make more money if they built the car parts somewhere where the people can't afford to buy cars. doesn't seem to be working out so well. wonder what went wrong?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:46 PM on 10/11/2008
- JBS I'm a Fan of JBS permalink
photo

Just a slight miscalculation ... as part of the deal, they laid off all the workers who COULD afford to buy cars.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:37 AM on 10/12/2008

GM was lost when it bought the trolley companies, only to destroy them for the cars and buses. Good thing it didn't buy up the railroad system; it would have been gone as well.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:20 AM on 10/12/2008
- JBS I'm a Fan of JBS permalink
photo

GM is a major manufacturer of diesel traction engines for railroads.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:36 AM on 10/12/2008
photo

Henry Ford had this figured out a hundred years ago. "If I pay a man enough to buy my car, he'll buy my car".

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:59 AM on 10/12/2008

It won't be a merger, it'll basically be GM swallowing Chrysler whole and spitting out what it doesn't need, ie. cutting jobs and shutting down factories. Besides the Germans dumped Chrysler because Chrysler was bringing the Germans down. Just a sad state of affairs, but this is the free market doing what it does, survival of the fittest, right? Isn't this how the cut throat dog eat dog world of Repub Darwinian economics works? Just good ole fashioned competition. If the foreign car companies are making cars that people want to buy, who's fault is that? But GM is trying, Bob Lutz really seems like he's working to get GM up and running again, with the Volt, for example.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:38 PM on 10/11/2008

Bob Lutz will be hailed as one of the greatest corporate loser figures of all times. Lutz has a proven track record to advance his career one failure at a time.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:02 PM on 10/11/2008

GM can only pay for a Chrysler acquisition with GM stock so why would the private owners of Chrysler want GM stock??

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:17 PM on 10/11/2008

They might take out some of the bailout money for Chrysler and end up with a profit. Just speculating.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:29 PM on 10/11/2008
- JBS I'm a Fan of JBS permalink
photo

The article said something about Cerberus Capitol wanting the 49% of GMAC that GM still controls in exchange for Chrysler.

If it goes through, expect GM to try to keep Jeep and dump the rest ... spin them off again like Daimler did or just shut them down completely and carry a huge tax loss forward.

You can kiss Plymouth and Dodge goodbye either way ... although GM would probably keep the rights to the "Hemi" engine just in case gas ever gets cheap again.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:44 AM on 10/12/2008

A massive merger to keep making crappy American cars!

Yeah, that'll work.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:47 PM on 10/11/2008

The problem with the car industry in the US is absent home competition. What is needed is more independent home grown car makers not less. If GM and Chrysler merge they are going to fail and what that monolith falls it is going to drag the whole country with it. Instead of merging they should talk about breaking up into smaller companies.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:47 PM on 10/11/2008

Right!

Like Standard Oil or AT&T.

The problem is that these smaller companies inevitably merge again over time when the marketplace is too crowded for them. This is a "Corptocracy", not a democracy. The recent and hurried bailout is the only proof you'll ever need on that score.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:04 PM on 10/11/2008

You are forgetting that Honda and Toyota (and Nissan?) already are domestic competition with factories in the US.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:30 PM on 10/11/2008
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 Next › Last » (5 pages total)
Comments are closed for this entry

You must be logged in to reply to this comment. Log in  or  Connect