WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court delayed the sale of most of Chrysler's assets to Fiat by telling the carmaker, "Wait a minute. I have to go in the back and talk to my boss," an old negotiating ploy that heretofore has not been used on the sale of a whole car company.
Fiat responded by walking around the parking lot with its friend, saying, "If the Supreme Court doesn't meet my price, I'm getting out of here. I'm doing THEM the favor, not the other way around."
The proposed solvent/insolvent hybrid
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who handles emergency matters arising from the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, refused to tell Fiat the invoice price of Chrysler, only the sticker price. Fiat responded by waving a copy of Consumer Reports in her face.
Observers say that the Supreme Court might tell Fiat that it can buy Chrysler for "only $349 a month," without saying that at rate it will take 18,000 years to pay off. Or the Court might take Fiat aside and say, "Don't tell my boss I said this, but I'm going to give you a special rate" that isn't special at all.
If Fiat walks away from the deal, it will mean near certain liquidation for Chrysler. However, it will mean nothing for the Supreme Court, which, in its new role as auto dealer, has many other companies on its lot to sell. In fact, some say it's just dicking around with Chrysler as preparation for really screwing over GM.
Chrysler and GM said they hoped the Supreme Court would come out of the back office soon so negotiations could resume. Lawyers for both said that speed was of the essence if the companies are to survive, even though everybody knows they probably won't.
As a comedian and Emmy-nominated writer who focuses on "cute analogy" I would like to thank all of you for participating in today's economic symposium.
They are built for handling so well at high speed and they have had a design that the germans could only dream of until recently. I like Alpha and Fiat :give them a chance. We gave the US car markers a chance for so long to screw us out of money!
1) The petitions are for a variety of reasons in my understanding. Such as a disconnect between liability from old Chrysler to Chrysler Group.
2) The new structure usurps the legal tradition of debt structures. Many of the debt holders would be shortchanged.
3) The company is already bankrupt. It is already "out of business".
4) This has major implications for the future. Saying "killing the rule of law" doesn't threaten the US...who do you sound like?
” ‘We would never walk away,’ Marchionne said in response to a question about whether Fiat would pull out of the deal if it isn’t completed by the June 15 deadline. ‘Never.’ Rather, Marchionne said that ‘We should just be patient and let the system work.’ ”
http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/foes-of-chrysler-deal-in-new-plea/
"The case of In re Chrysler LLC, Debtor has the potential to produce the most significant Supreme Court ruling on the government’s power to deal with economic crisis since the Court struck down major parts of President Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal, in Schechter Poultry Corp. v. U.S. in 1935 and U.S. v. Butler in 1936. But the Supreme Court will not actually rule on any of the basic legal challenges unless it first puts the Chrysler sale on hold, and then agrees to hear and decide the case itself...."
http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/key-points-of-chrysler-challenge/
You should pray, if you do, that the court turns this around and lets the government know it has serious boundries and they need to honor them. Nothing less than the success of our country lies at risk if we continue killing the rule of law.
Obama is playing the hand he was dealt with by Bush, who was too cute in this matter. Bush said in late 2008 he was philosophically opposed to bailing out the car companies with TARP money but did not want to leave the new president with an even greater financial disaster his first day in office. So, Bush played it both ways; got to set himself up as the true free market, small government conservative, yet not be in a position to be ultimately accussed of letting huge corporations fail on his watch.
It's funny how Repcons are so motivated by ideology when it is someone else losing their livlihood.