Comments by user: grvande
Most Popular
- Viewed
- Discussed
- E-mailed
- Photos: Lauren Conrad celebrates her 26th birthday at Hyde Bellagio
- Dina Titus dares to cross Harry Reid, maneuvers for Democratic safe seat
- Grammy Awards struggle with honoring Whitney Houston
- Investigators seek answers to Whitney Houston’s death
- Photos: The late, great Whitney Houston is the soundtrack of my life
- Vegas gala to celebrate Muhammad Ali’s 70th birthday, benefit Ruvo Center
- Strip Scribbles: Is ‘Dancing With the Stars’ at Tropicana on again?
- List of Grammy winners in select major categories
- A personal tribute and a plea: Memories of Whitney Houston
- Abiding by tax law is not praiseworthy
Blogs
Elsewhere
Caesars' unit extends term loan maturity
The Kats Report
Color from scene at Thomas & Mack: We have a wire job! Rebels win, and Louie Armstrong sings!
South Point owner Michael Gaughan's take on 'Vegas Stripped': 'I'll give it an 8' (5 Comments)
Author relishes writing the life story of ‘larger-than-life’ Oscar Goodman (3 Comments)
Elsewhere
Landowner: All roads could lead to Uxbridge casino
Revel reveals smoke-free casino opening
Cirque du Soleil show in Sands China casino to close this month
The Sun
Locally owned and independent for more than 50 years.



You need to get your facts straight before making comments about Chrysler. In 1997, Chrysler was reported to be one of the premier auto makers in the world. Chrysler was attractive to Mercedes (Daimler) as a merger partner specifically due to the fact that it was so profitable, efficient, and had a large cash reserve. While combining Daimler and Chrysler was legally a merger, operationally, Daimler management was in control of Chrysler during the merger.
Daimler management used the Chrysler cash reserve and profits in the first years of the merger to fund the development of the Mercedes vehicle line up while systematically removing almost every Chrysler senior executive. Profits from the Chrysler financial were credited to Daimler, not Chrysler during the merger. Investment in Chrysler products was kept to a minimum and internal cross-charges were used to transfer significant amounts of cash from Chrysler to Daimler.
By the time Daimler decided to devest itself of Chrysler, the cash situation was critical and the product line was suffering due to almost ten years of Daimler mismanagement. Unfortunately, Chrysler became a stand alone company at the worst time since the Great Depression. Starting with gas prices in the US over $4 per gallon and complicated by the credit crisis. I am not sure if Chrysler "deserves help", but it is clear that these unfortunate circumstances are negatively effecting every auto manufacture in the world, on every continent. The European, Chinese, Korean, and Japanese auto manufacturers are all going to suffer this year, even Mercedes and Toyota. Many will post a loss for 2008 and many more in 2009. Helping Chrysler and the other US manufacturers is critical to the recovery of the US economy. Other countries are helping their automotive manufacturing concerns. Finally, are we so dishonest to claim that we (the US taxpayers) are not "helping" the transplants when we give huge tax abatements to Toyota, Mercedes, Honda, etc for building a plant in the USA.
Are we really certain that we want to become a country with no manufacturing base that relies on other countries for all of our production requirements?