SPONSORED BY:

Chrysler: Should We Have Let It Die?

Why liquidating the automaker might have been a smart thing to do.

 

Email To A Friend

Please fill in the following information and we'll email this link.

Separate multiple addresses with commas

SPONSORED BY
 

The government was successful when it warned that if the Supreme Court delayed the Chapter 11 process of Chrysler more than a few days, the No.3 US car company might be forced into liquidation. It is not clear that liquidation would have been a bad result.

Fiat, which will be part of the group taking over the best of Chrysler's assets and will become the de facto operating partner wrote to the court that "If the sale transaction is not completed soon, there can be no assurance that a replacement transaction could be structured and agreed that would preserve any aspect of Chrysler as a going concern."  The Justice Department said in its filing that delaying the Chapter 11 process would not be in the best interests of either debtors or the public interest. It is not entirely clear why that was true.

The arguments for keeping Chrysler on its present path through Chapter 11 have been based, at least in part, on the premise that the car company's best assets are not worth very much. That is entirely untrue. The company sold more than 79,000 vehicles last month. That was down 47% from the previous year. Chrysler sold over 60,000 trucks for the month.

Chrysler still has roughly 10% of the domestic market. VW, the largest car company in Europe has coveted more market share in the US. The Koreans have been aggressively working on raising American sales. Hyundai certainly has the capital to buy a piece of Chrysler. It would have to keep open many dealers, keep and perhaps improve factories, and would certainly continue to employ thousands of Chrysler workers.

A liquidation of Chrysler may well have been bad for some creditors who might have gotten less than the $.29 per dollar of secured debt that they will receive under the current arrangement. Liquidation may not favor the UAW's interests. That does not mean selling the company off in parts would have been an unmitigated disaster.

Label

Newsweek Top Stories
Visions of a Decade
Visions of a Decade

From 2000-2009, one photo per month.

The Failure of Copenhagen
The Failure of Copenhagen

Why there could be a silver lining in a failed climate treaty.

Sex Scandals of the 2000s
Sex Scandals of the 2000s

From John Edwards to Mark Sanford, the decade's memorable affairs.

118 Days in Hell
118 Days in Hell

A NEWSWEEK journalist recounts his captivity in Iran.

Discuss

Sponsored by

Member Comments

  • Posted By: bighead1191 @ 06/13/2009 10:05:22 AM

    "But now we can't say anything to them or put stricter trade agreements in place, because China will just simply call in the notes on all the loans they gave us."

    Actually that is pretty unlikely. As soon as China starts cashing in, everyone will. This will cause a firesale, and the worth of the bonds they hold will plummet by the time they get their money. It is in their best interests to hold the debt, and keep buying it.

    If you owe China a million dollars, China owns you. If you owe China a trillion dollars, you own China.

  • Posted By: willid3 @ 06/11/2009 5:01:47 PM

    not sure that you didn't forget the costs we the taxpayers would have incurred the moment the company was liquidated. we would had added the medical benefits for all of the retirees immediately. we would have added the cost of making up some their pensions. and probably had the additional bonus of them signing up for SS. and then there would have been the additional unemployment benefits. and thats the car company. there is the additional benefit of adding the majority of dealerships (all 2600 in this case) workers. and their retirees. and their benefits. plus we could add some of the parts makers workers. and for those that failed, their retirees.
    and thats just the beginning
    but of course they could sell some the assets. such as they are.
    there are the car plants of course. not much market for them. after all, Toyota just built a brand new one. and moth balled it before it ever built a vehicle. so not much demand for that.
    well we could sell the land, but RE and CRE in particular are tanking. and that doesn't include the required cleanup costs.
    we could see the equipment. most likely taker? the Chinese. at Chinese prices. taking the equipment to you guessed it, China.
    the inventory of vehicles? not much demand today, less tomorrow
    so just what assets are we thinking of as being valuable?

  • Posted By: page-up @ 06/11/2009 3:27:56 PM

    It makes you wonder whose interests are being served. Who is benefiting from these Bank deals and Car deals? It surely is not the Tax Payer.

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse

My Take

Customize the NEWSWEEK homepage
to feature your favorite columnists.

Customize Now
 
PHOTOS
What About Us?
Wall Street's problems have captured the attention of Congress, the White House and the media. But on the country's Main Streets ordinary folks are wondering if anyone is paying attention to them. A look at how Americans are coping with the economic crisis.