http://www.foxbusiness.com/story/markets/industries/industrials/gm-chrysler-merger-talks---reports/

More of a trade I guess but still....

I don't see this making any sense at all, for GM. They already have too many brands, now they're talking about taking on three more?

Jeep is the only thing Chrysler's got that would be a good fit at GM.

Hmm...buy Chrysler and kill off most of it? Does cut down the competition between domestic SUVs, but I think that ship has not just sailed but rather has sunk.

There are a lot of pieces to the merger puzzle. As an automotive historian, I have to be leery of almost any U.S. auto manufacturer merger - they are rarely done out of anything but desperation, and even more rarely do they produce lasting benefits. In one of the more well-known auto industry mergers, Studebaker-Packard was created by the purchase of the Studebaker Corporation by the Packard Motor Car Company in 1954. Despite common beliefs to the contrary, Packard acquired Studebaker in the transaction. While Studebaker was the larger of the two companies, Packard's balance sheet and executive team were stronger than that of the South Bend company. As another well-known example, American Motors Corporation (AMC) was formed on January 14, 1954 by the merger of the Nash-Kelvinator Corporation and the Hudson Motor Car Company. The next chapters in the AMC story weren't mergers, but still bear mentioning. In the 1970's, AMC formed an alliance with France's Renault. This lasted until March 2, 1987, when the Chrysler Corporation purchased AMC for $360 million and at that point use of the AMC and Renault brand names ended in the United States. The Jeep line (which most industry experts say was really Chrysler's only interest in the buyout) continued, along with a few Eagle models.

Going back even further, In 1952 the Kaiser-Frazer Corporation was renamed Kaiser Motors Corporation. In 1953 Kaiser bought the ailing Willys-Overland company and merged the operations together under the name Willys Motors. The decision was then made to exit the passenger car market at the end of the 1955 model year. By 1956, Willys Motors was building only utility vehicles, many for export, and was turning a healthy profit. In 1970, the Kaiser Jeep Corporation (as the company had been renamed in 1963) was sold to American Motors Corporation which continued to manufacture Jeep vehicles until AMC itself was purchased by Chrysler in 1987 as previously mentioned above.

General Motors has had a history of acquisitions, not mergers. It pretty much goes without saying that GM would be the "senior partner" in any GM-Chrysler (or GM-Ford, or GM-Ford-Chrysler) merger. What the cost would be to GM to make this merger happen - in dollars it doesn't have - and what the resulting marketing, management, dealer and distribution strategies would be are fascinating to think about. There is the potential for success here, but also a huge risk of failure. That's what a free market economy does for you - and TO you. My own personal opinion is that both GM and Ford are more viable separately than they would be together. Chrysler has some very serious isues that a merger with either GM or Ford would bring to a fairly rapid conclusion, one way or the other.

Sometimes you can't make things better, but you can make them stop.

GM isn't quite that desperate yet - not by a long shot. They have demonstrated lately the ability to build quality, relevant vehicles . . . now they have to rationalize their huge holdings and corporate strategy to concentrate on those lines that are profitable and sustainable and stop building cars people don't want, don't like and don't buy. Fortunately for Corvette enthusiasts, the Corvette is none of those things. It will survive, as will most of Chevrolet and Cadillac. Buick has been hugely successful in China. Everything else is on the table.

Again, just my opinion, and I am an admitted optimist. It doesn't help that Chrysler's current owner (Cerberus) uses the name of the mythological three-headed dog that guards the gates of Hell. Wonder why they chose that name?

Merge Ford, GM + Chrysler.

Spend the recent $25 billion 'loan' and get rid of all the unprofitable aspects of current business. That's pensions, car lines, union labor, debt burden, etc. Throw in another $25 billion. Whatever it takes. Emerge as a new company - and make some money.

Or let them die on the vine and don't add to the trillions of US taxpayer debt.

It's a new ecomonic paradigm, folks.

I don't think the historic performance of Detroit is valid anymore.

If Corvettes, Cadillacs and Cheverolets are profitable, than build them.

Ford @ 2 bucks, GM @ 4 bucks a share.

The weak, sick and wounded are about to be weeded out of the gene pool.

If the talk that GM is considering a trade -- Cerberus trades Chrysler to them in exchange for a big piece of GMAC -- is true, that's a sucker deal for GM. GMAC is the closest thing they have to a cash cow. Besides, Cerberus already owns a piece of it.

there is absolutely nothing of any value for GM in any deal with Chrysler. GM might not survive anyway, but adding a ton of worthless product which isn't selling just doesn't make sense.

at least 1 of GM, Ford and Chrysler will not survive the next 24 months. i'm pretty sure Chrysler will die, but GM and Ford may join them if they do anything stupid. buying Chrysler would qualify as stupid...

it's being a very long while then I didn't posted here

I read Pete DeLorenzo's Autoextremist rant this week http://www.autoextremist.com (rant #467) and I spotted the following at the last paragraph then I quoted

And one final thought: To demonstrate just how crazy things are getting in the Motor City, I will bring forth a new scenario that’s emerging, and that is that the GM-Chrysler talks have ended for good (the word was that they were only put on “hold” due to the burgeoning financial crisis). Instead, GM has already moved on to renewed, serious discussions with Carlos Ghosn about the possibility of merging GM’s global operations with Renault-Nissan.

when I readed this, I was shocked but after some reflexion and when I read some French articles then Ghosn named Patrick Pelata as Renault's COO which some folks concluded then Ghosn had picken his successor to take the post of CEO of Renault and with Ghosn thinking from time to time of a 3rd partner....there more then meets the eyes.

St�phane Dumas - 18 October 2008 10:28 AM

when I readed this, I was shocked but after some reflexion and when I read some French articles then Ghosn named Patrick Pelata as Renault's COO which some folks concluded then Ghosn had picken his successor to take the post of CEO of Renault and with Ghosn thinking from time to time of a 3rd partner....there more then meets the eyes.

GM merging with Renault would be worth it just to see Junior Nation's reaction when they hear he'll race a Renault Clio.

This is what Jalopnik posted last week:

http://jalopnik.com/5064934/gm+chrysler-merger-rumor-roundup-deal-to-be-done-by-halloween-mandatory-two-month-furlough-for-chrysler-engineers

Cerberus and GM are moving full-steam-ahead in their efforts to get a GM-Chrysler deal done by the end of October. Today also brings news Renault may have their hand in the cookie jar too, negotiating for one or more parts of Chrysler and leading to speculation the Auburn Hills, MI-based automaker could be divvied up among several companies: Basically the worst-case scenario envisioned when Cerberus Capital Management took over in 2007.

Finally, we've got an unsubstantiated rumor engineering employees at Chrysler may be getting two months off sans pay beginning...drumroll please...November 1st. Coincidence? Maybe.

UPDATE: We now hear from a Chrysler source that rumors of an engineering furlough are not true; that's why we call them "rumors."

Ford @ 2 bucks

If I were the Ford family, I'd buy the company outright and take it private.

Renault/Nissan + Chrysler makes sense. GM doesn't fit into any part of that equation.

This is like watching a train wreck in slow motion. DON'T DO IT!

We're livin' in strange times indeed, folks...

http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20081028/AUTO01/810280332