"One advantage of private ownership is that we can sell nonearning assets to generate cash," Chrysler President and Vice Chairman Tom LaSorda told the Detroit Free Press. "To date, we've identified over $1 billion in non-earning assets and we're more than halfway to achieving that goal." Of course, another advantage of private ownership is that Chrysler doesn't have to reveal financial information, so why advertise the fire sale? "It has a lot to do with the media," LaSorda claimed. "They like to write about us and other auto makers who post $15.5 billion or an $8.7 billion loss just to get a few headlines." A more likely motivation: heading off further cuts to ChryCo's credit ratings. At the same time, LaSorda announced a forthcoming $1.8b spend to make the Jefferson North Assembly Plant more environmentally friendly, develop new cars and keep 400 jobs in Michigan. The green initiative– including energy management systems, efficient lighting and the use of solid waste and paint sludge for energy– will clear the way for Jefferson North to build a new, car-based (i.e. brand dilluting) Jeep Grand Cherokee, scheduled to debut in 2010.
Find Reviews by Make:
Read all comments
Why would Cerberus spend 1.8 billion on a factory (in Detroit of all places) if they are going to strip and sell the company? Does Chery want a plant in Detroit?
what? a car-based Jeep Grand Cherokee? isn’t that what the Patriot and Compass are for?
Nissan has a technical center not too far from there in Farmington Hills.
Julianne – I’m guessing that it’s a misunderstanding on the media’s part.
What is supposedly happening is that the Grand Cherokee, Duragon, and possibly Aspen if they decide to are all going to be on the same unibody platform. The GC was already unibody, so this is nothing new. But, with the announcement of the Durango going to a unibody platform, some might equate unibody with car-based.
A sign of the times. Chrysler is up and leaving the large body-on-frame SUV market altogether. Who would have thought that 10 years ago?
windswords – Maybe it’s a sign that they’re not planning on stripping and flipping Chrysler? Call me crazy, I know.
They’re all “Unibody.” Each and every Jeep wagon type thingy is like that.
That to me says car based already, since there isn’t a “REAL” truck on the planet that doesn’t have a frame.
“To date, we’ve identified over $1 billion in non-earning assets and we’re more than halfway to achieving that goal.”
“They like to write about us and other auto makers who post $15.5 billion or an $8.7 billion loss just to get a few headlines.”
Not to be disrespectful of our Detroit Dynamos, but when they post losses like that, isn’t it fair to say the whole shebang is “non-earning”?
Chryslers Been building Unibody Cars and Trucks for quite some time. Nothing shocking there, except for up until the worthless wagons, Compass and Patriot. Jeep has always use there own platforms and their Ventures with AMC/Renault got them onto building unitized jeeps.
Chrysler really is the most intriguing of the detroit 3 to follow. Ford is the most boring, and GM is the most comical.
“Chrysler really is the most intriguing of the detroit 3 to follow. Ford is the most boring, and GM is the most comical.”
Scottie I think you nailed it.
It’s not sorta good, it’s LaSorda good !.
The Big Three remind me of the Black Night from Monty Python. They keep thinking slashing and burning will somehow magically get them to profitability without having products customers want. Each time they slash and burn they cut off another body part. Pretty soon all you’ll see left is a head on the ground yelling “Have at you !” at Toyota.
Usta Bee – That applies to Chrysler quite well especially. They had a fair amount of momentum built up in the 90’s with the Neon, Viper, LH’s, Cloud Cars, ’96 minivans, ’94 Ram… Too bad they cut way too many corners and got bitten in the arse because of it.
So they sold themselves out to Daimler and started chopping off some limbs, most importantly the small car team that was responsible for beating the Japanese at their own game with the Neon. Of course, nobody mentions or remembers that the 1G Neons outperformed just about everybody because of the severe cost-cutting that they were doing at the time absolutely destroyed the car’s reputation. This was also the group that was responsible for the original Stratus and the PT Cruiser.
Chrysler probably could have been the best-off domestic today if they would have decided to do something about their quality and reliability issues instead of claiming defeat and running to Stuttgart to sell its soul.
build a new, car-based (i.e. brand dilluting) Jeep Grand Cherokee, scheduled to debut in 2010.
I think i just threw up in my mouth a little.
Seriously, could someone who actually cares about the jeep brand please buy it from the .8 before it’s too late?
Chrysler began converting virtually their entire automobile line to unibody construction in 1960. The only exception was the Imperial, which was switched to unibody in 1967.
Technically, Chrysler had first used monocoque construction on the short-lived 1934 Airflow. Unibody is the term used for a partial monocoque construction that has a subframe.
While it’s true that the Caliber-based Patriot/Compass are also unibody construction, the rest of the current Jeep lineup (Wrangler, LIberty, Grand Cherokee, and Commander) still maintain a traditional truck, body-on-frame construction. I believe body-on-frame construction is what is really meant by the little ‘Trail Rated’ badge on most Jeeps.