Fiat 500, page #13

Fiat 500 Price Analytics

About Fiat 500

Auto blog

Fiat Chrysler denies GM's 'preposterous' bribery allegations

DETROIT — Allegations by General Motors that Fiat Chrysler Automobiles bribed union officials are “preposterous” and read like a script from a “third-rate spy movie,” FCA lawyers wrote in court documents filed Monday. GM, in a court motion last week, alleged that Fiat Chrysler used foreign bank accounts to bribe union officials so they would stick GM with higher labor costs. But in a response, the Italian-American automaker fired back, calling GMÂ’s claims “defamatory and baseless.” GM alleged in a court filing last week that FCA spent millions on bribes by stashing the money in foreign accounts. The allegations of new evidence were made in a motion asking a federal judge to reconsider his July dismissal of a federal racketeering lawsuit against Fiat Chrysler. In trying to revive the lawsuit, GM alleged that bribes were paid to two former United Auto Workers presidents, as well as a former union vice president and at least one former GM employee. In its response, Fiat Chrysler said GM has to know that the prospect of getting the judge to overturn the dismissal is slim to none. “So this motion is apparently a vehicle to make more defamatory and baseless accusations about a competitor that is winning in the marketplace.” FCA denied allegations by GM that FCA paid two “moles” to infiltrate GM and send inside information. The company also denied that foreign bank accounts were involved. “That GM has extended its attacks to individual FCA officers and employees, making wild allegations against them without a shred of factual support, is despicable,” FCA lawyers wrote. GM's claims are based on the alleged existence of foreign bank accounts, which are legal, Fiat Chrysler wrote. “There is not one well-pled allegation in the proposed amended complaint (by GM) that these foreign bank accounts were used to pay bribes or facilitate any other illegal conduct,” FCA's response said. GM contends that bribes were paid to former United Auto Workers Presidents Dennis Williams and Ron Gettelfinger, as well as Vice President Joe Ashton. It also alleges money was paid to GM employees including Al Iacobelli, a former FCA labor negotiator who was hired and later released by GM. GM alleges that payments were made so the officials would saddle GM with more than $1 billion in additional labor costs.

GM cites evidence of offshore accounts, wants FCA racketeering lawsuit revived

General Motors on Monday asked a U.S. federal judge to reinstate a racketeering lawsuit against Fiat Chrysler Automobiles NV (FCA), saying it has new information on foreign accounts used in an alleged bribery scheme involving its smaller rival and union leaders. In its filing to U.S. District Judge Paul Borman, GM says the scheme, which it alleges occurred between FCA executives and former United Auto Workers (UAW) leaders, "is much broader and deeper than previously suspected or revealed as it involved FCA Group apparently using various accounts in foreign countries ... to control corrupt individuals by compensating and corrupting those centrally involved in the scheme to harm GM." Last month, Borman threw out the racketeering lawsuit, saying the No. 1 U.S. automaker's alleged injuries were not caused by FCA's alleged violations. GM alleged FCA bribed UAW officials over many years to corrupt the bargaining process and gain advantages that cost GM billions of dollars. GM was seeking "substantial damages" that one analyst said could have totaled at least $6 billion. "These new facts warrant amending the court's prior judgment, so we are respectfully asking the court to reinstate the case," GM said in a statement. "FCA will continue to defend itself vigorously and pursue all available remedies in response to GM's attempts to resurrect this groundless lawsuit," FCA said in a statement. In affidavits accompanying GM's filing, attorneys for the automaker said "reliable information concerning the existence of foreign bank accounts" used in the alleged scheme had only come to light recently. "The UAW is unaware of any allegations regarding illicit off-shore accounts as claimed," by GM, the UAW said in a statement. "If GM actually has substantive information supporting its allegations, we ask that they provide it to us so we can take all appropriate actions." Earnings/Financials Government/Legal UAW/Unions Chrysler Fiat GM

North America profit helps Fiat Chrysler limit its losses from coronavirus

MILAN — Italian-American automaker Fiat Chrysler Automobiles (FCA) posted a smaller-than-expected operating loss in the second quarter, as a small profit in North America helped to limit the damage wrought by the COVID-19 pandemic. FCA said on Friday it had an adjusted loss before interest and tax of 928 million euros ($1.1 billion) in April-June, versus a forecast 1.87 billion euro ($2.2 billion) loss in an analyst poll compiled by Reuters. The group also said it made adjusted earnings before interest and tax of 39 million euros ($46.2 million) in North America, the home market of its Jeep and Ram brands, in the quarter. Milan-listed FCA shares were up 1.2% at 1125 GMT, after being little changed before the results. Chief Executive Mike Manley said the group's plants were up and running and car dealers were selling in showrooms and online, following disruptions caused by the pandemic. "We have the flexibility and financial strength to push ahead with our plans," he said in a statement. FCA, which is set to tie-up with Peugeot maker PSA to create Stellantis, the world's fourth largest carmaker, said on ongoing probe launched by European Commission competition authorities was not expected to delay the merger timetable. Despite the pandemic, PSA earlier this week delivered a profit in the first half of the year and stuck to its medium-term margin goal. FCA said its industrial free cash flow was minus 4.9 billion euros in the second quarter, with a slightly lower cash burn compared with January-March.  

2021 Ford Bronco is here, and a Stellantis is born | Autoblog Podcast #636

In this week's Autoblog Podcast, Editor-in-Chief Greg Migliore is joined by West Coast Editor James Riswick and Road Test Editor Zac Palmer. They kick things off by diving headfirst into the Ford Bronco and Bronco Sport before moving to what they've been driving: 2020 BMW X3 xDrive 30e, 2020 Hyundai Ioniq Hybrid and a 2020 Ford Expedition. Then, the three tackle Stellantis, Chrysler's new corporate name. Finally, James and Zac reminisce and discuss their time in a couple classic Honda coupes. Autoblog Podcast #636 Get The Podcast iTunes – Subscribe to the Autoblog Podcast in iTunes RSS – Add the Autoblog Podcast feed to your RSS aggregator MP3 – Download the MP3 directly Rundown Introducing the 2021 Ford Bronco and Bronco Sport Cars we're driving 2020 BMW X3 xDrive 30e 2020 Hyundai Ioniq Hybrid 2020 Ford Expedition News Stellantis Retro Hondas 1999 Honda Prelude Type SH and 1999 Honda Civic Si Feedback Email – Podcast@Autoblog.com Review the show on iTunes Related Video:

Stellantis — seriously? Exploring the pros and cons of Chrysler’s new name

I took Wednesday off. I came in Thursday and Chrysler was renamed Stellantis. Aside from lighting Twitter on fire and drawing a lot of snarky responses from car journalists, the name is actually decent. Let’s look at it from a few angles. For starters, Chrysler, the 95-year-old automaker founded in Detroit by Walter P. Chrysler (his name still adorns everything from a major freeway in Michigan to an iconic art deco skyscraper in New York), isnÂ’t actually Chrysler. ItÂ’s FCA, which stands for Fiat Chrysler Automobiles. The name change actually happened in 2014, which you might have easily missed. The American unit, formerly Chrysler, is known as FCA US in some legal matters, but does not operate independently.   The Stellantis name takes effect in 2021. HereÂ’s why itÂ’s needed: Fiat Chrysler is merging with Group PSA. (Peugeot and Citroen) to form a transatlantic alliance that will be larger than even Ford. Stellantis sounds a lot better than FCA-PSA. Or PSA-FCA. You might poke fun at it, but it beats the alternatives. Or at least it could be worse. Stellantis is the name for the corporate entity that will house Chrysler, Fiat, Peugeot, Citroen, and oh by the way, Opel and Vauxhall, which PSA bought in 2017 when GM unloaded its European arm.  Your Jeep will not say Stellantis on the fender. Your Hemi Hellcat wonÂ’t say “powered by Stellantis” under the hood. Your Fiat 500 or Alfa Romeo Giulia will not have a script “Stellantis" crest. Speaking of that, roll call: HereÂ’s all of the brands that will be housed under the Stellantis umbrella: Chrysler, Dodge, Jeep, Fiat, Fiat Professional, Mopar, Alfa Romeo, Maserati, Abarth, Ram, Lancia, Peugeot, Citroen, DS, Opel and Vauxhall. ThereÂ’s also a couple of lesser-known subsidiaries, Comau and Teksid, that sell parts. ThatÂ’s 18 brands. They have origins in Detroit, Paris, Turin, Chalton (England), Russelsheim (Germany) and several other places. All of these carmakers have deep histories. No one was going to agree on using someone elseÂ’s name. You might notice Chrysler is still in there. Chrysler as the brandname for the 300 sedan and Pacifica minivan lives on. Stellantis replaces FCA, which replaced Chrysler, as the name of the parent company. Yes, it's a little confusing. HereÂ’s more perspective. Chrysler was once owned by Cerberus, a three-headed dog that guards the gates of hell, according to mythology.

The company formerly known as Chrysler is now Stellantis

Introducing Stellantis. Talk to your doctor before using Stellantis as side effects may include model redundancy, the overwhelming urge to apply Dodge badges to Peugeot crossovers, and weak stream. Honestly, how can you not poke just a little fun at the name chosen for the new multi-national corporation that will result once the merger of Fiat Chrysler Automobiles (FCA) and Peugeot S.A. (Groupe PSA) is completed in the first quarter of 2021. According to the press release, "Stellantis is rooted in the Latin verb 'stello' meaning 'to brighten with stars' ... The name's Latin origins pay tribute to the rich history of its founding companies while the evocation of astronomy captures the true spirt of optimism, energy and renewal driving this industry-changing merger." The "Latin origins" of the French company Peugeot and the Italian Fiat are obvious. Chrysler, on the other hand, was founded by a man born in Kansas whose father was a Canadian-American of German and Dutch ancestry (thanks Wikipedia). His mother was also of German ancestry. So yeah, the name Stellantis is really only related to the Peugeot and Fiat bits. The Americans are just along for the ride with their Jeeps and Hellcats.  And it should be noted that we will henceforth never write "Stellantis" in ALL CAPS as the corporation does because it's silly and we don't do it for Hummer, Mini, etc. Admittedly, Fiat could go either way since it's literally an acronym, but Fiat doesn't even bother doing that any more.   The name Stellantis will only be applied at the corporate level, so effectively in place where you previously would've said Fiat-Chrysler or FCA. There won't be a Stellantis Challenger.  We produced a list last year of all the cars that are currently made by the brands within Stellantis. Here's also a list of all the names that the company we generically know as "Chrysler" has gone through over the years. Chrysler Corporation (1925-1998) DaimlerChrysler (1998-2007) Chrysler LLC (2007-2009) Chrysler Group (2009-2014) Fiat Chrysler Automobiles (2014-2021) Stellantis  There have also been secondary corporate entities. There was Diamond Star Motors from 1985 to 2015, a manufacturing joint venture between Mitsubishi and whatever Chrysler was called at the time. It resulted in the Plymouth Laser, a randomly selected example pictured above, amongst other automotive diamonds.

Federal judge throws out GM's racketeering lawsuit against Fiat Chrysler

  DETROIT — A federal judge on Wednesday threw out a racketeering lawsuit General Motors had filed against smaller rival Fiat Chrysler Automobiles, saying the No. 1 U.S. automaker's alleged injuries were not caused by FCA's alleged violations. GM officials said in statement they "strongly disagree" with the order by U.S. District Court Judge Paul Borman, whom the automaker had sought to have removed from the case, and would appeal. "There is more than enough evidence from the guilty pleas of former FCA executives to conclude that the company engaged in racketeering, our complaint was timely and showed in detail how their multi-million dollar bribes caused direct harm to GM," GM said in a statement. The Detroit company added that Borman's decision "would let wrongdoers off the hook." GM filed the racketeering lawsuit against FCA last November, alleging its rival bribed United Auto Workers (UAW) union officials over many years to corrupt the bargaining process and gain advantages, costing GM billions of dollars. GM was seeking "substantial damages" that one analyst said could have totaled at least $6 billion. FCA had called the case meritless and asked Borman to dismiss it. On Wednesday, Borman dismissed the lawsuit "with prejudice," meaning GM cannot refile the complaint. "The direct victims of defendants' alleged bribery scheme are FCA's workers," Borman wrote of FCA. "GM's high labor costs were not an injury proximately caused by FCA's bribes, and any competitive injury that GM suffered as a result of FCA's advantage in labor costs is an indirect injury." "The dismissal of GM's complaint with prejudice earlier today vindicates our position," FCA said in a statement. On Monday, the Sixth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals denied GM's petition to remove Borman from the case, but said the two automakers' chief executives didn't have to meet to try to settle the case as Borman had ordered. In calling for that, Borman had called the lawsuit "a waste of time and resources."   Government/Legal UAW/Unions Chrysler Fiat GM

Appeals court rejects GM's bid to remove judge from Fiat Chrysler lawsuit

A U.S. appeals court on Monday denied General Motors' petition to remove a lower court judge from its racketeering lawsuit against Fiat Chrysler Automobiles, but said the companies' heads need not meet to settle the issue. The Sixth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said U.S. District Judge Paul Borman abused his discretion by requiring GM CEO Mary Barra and FCA's head, Mike Manley, to meet face-to-face for reasons unrelated to the case, and without taking into account the risks of travel during the COVID-19 pandemic. The district judge's order for the parties to report back to the court in only eight days was also unwarranted, the appeals court said. Borman in June ordered Barra and Manley to meet by July 1, and later amended his order to allow other officials in their place. "We do not mean to say, however, that the district judge may not order a pretrial settlement conference and/or mediation in the normal course," the appeals court said in a filing. The court in June stayed Borman's order requiring officials from the two firms to resolve the lawsuit, and on Monday rejected GM's request for a new judge to oversee the case, saying Borman's desire for a quick settlement was "not so extreme" that he needed to be replaced. GM said in a statement it was grateful that the court had quickly reviewed and granted its petition for a writ of mandamus, that is, setting aside the requirement to meet. However, the company did not comment on the rejection of its request to reassign the case to another judge. GM sued FCA last year, accusing the Italian-American company's executives of bribing United Auto Workers union officials to secure labor agreements that put GM at a disadvantage. Government/Legal Chrysler Fiat GM

FCA: PSA deal terms still intact despite dividend cut report

MILAN - Fiat Chrysler (FCA) said the terms of its merger with France's PSA had not changed after an Italian newspaper report that it was looking to spin off assets to reduce a planned 5.5 billion euro ($6.2 billion) cash pay-out to its shareholders. FCA said on Friday that it was sticking to the deal agreed with PSA in December before the coronavirus crisis hit demand for cars. "The structure and terms of the merger are agreed and remain unchanged," a spokesman for the Italian-American automaker said. FCA and PSA plan to finalise their merger by the first quarter of next year. PSA declined to comment. Italian business newspaper Il Sole 24 Ore said that FCA could conserve cash by reducing the special dividend, possibly by handing shareholders assets as compensation. Il Sole reported that talks were at a very early stage and no decision had been taken, adding the that aim was to keep the 5.5 billion euro value of the special dividend but to turn its "nature" from cash to assets. FCA, has just agreed a 6.3 billion euro state-backed loan to help its Italian unit and the whole country's automotive industry to weather the crisis. Although this does not bar FCA from paying the dividend, as it is not due until 2021 and would be paid by Dutch parent company Fiat Chrysler Automobiles NV, Italian politicians have called into question such a large cash pay-out. Options being considered include spinning off the Sevel van business, a 50-50 joint venture between the two groups, or FCA's Alfa Romeo and Maserati brands, Il Sole said. Sevel, which produces vans in Atessa's plant in central Italy, Europe's largest van assembly facility, could be valued between 2.5 and 3 billion euro, Il Sole said. Its spin-off to FCA shareholders could also help address European Union concerns about the merger's consequences on competition in the van segment. This option looks however complicated, Il Sole said, as it would require PSA transferring its 50% stake in Sevel to FCA. Another option is scrapping a planned spin-off of PSA's controlling stake in parts maker Faurecia, Il Sole said. A source close to the matter said that PSA could instead sell its Faurecia stake before the merger and keep the cash proceeds of the sale within the new merged company. ($1 = 0.8899 euros; additional reporting by Sarah White in Paris; editing by Alexander Smith)

Appeals court delays 'sensible resolution' meeting between GM, Fiat Chrysler CEOs

DETROIT — Three federal appeals judges have delayed a court-ordered meeting between the CEOs of General Motors and Fiat Chrysler to try to settle a lawsuit over corruption by union leaders. U.S. District Court Judge Paul Borman last week ordered GM CEO Mary Barra and FCA CEO Mike Manley to meet before July 1. But GM on Friday asked the federal appeals court in Cincinnati to overturn the order and remove Borman from the case. In an order issued Monday, three appellate judges delayed Borman's order to provide time to consider legal points raised by GM. GM is suing crosstown rival FCA alleging that it got an advantage by paying off United Auto Workers union leaders to reduce labor costs during contract talks. FCAÂ’s former labor chief, Al Iacobelli, is in prison, although the company denies that it directed any prohibited payments. In his order last week, Borman described the lawsuit as a “nuclear option” that would be a “waste of time and resources” for years if he allows the case to move forward. The judge ordered Barra and Manley to sit down without lawyers by July 1 and reach a “sensible resolution of this huge legal distraction.” Borman wants an update from them on a public video conference that same day. Over the weekend he modified the order to allow lawyers to attend the meeting. In a court filing, GM called BormanÂ’s order a “profound abuse” of power. “The court possesses no authority to order the CEOs of GM and FCA to engage in settlement discussions, reach a resolution and then appear alone at a pretrial conference eight days later, without counsel,” GMÂ’s attorneys said. “Second, the court has no business labeling a properly filed federal lawsuit assigned to the court for impartial adjudication ‘a distractionÂ’ or a ‘nuclear option,’” GM said. Borman canÂ’t be viewed as impartial, company lawyers said. The judge declined to comment. In a court filing Monday, Fiat Chrysler lawyers wrote that GM didn't make a good case to remove Borman because judges routinely direct lawsuit parties to talk about settling. The lawyers wrote that GM originally wanted the case assigned to Borman but now apparently is worried that his tough questions mean he will dismiss GM's claims. “GM should not be permitted now to complain that that judge has turned out to be less hospitable to GMÂ’s claims than GM anticipated. Parties are not permitted to engage in such judge shopping," the filing said.