Publication:
How the Chrysler Reorganization Differed From Prior Practice

Thumbnail Image

Date

2013

Published Version

Journal Title

Journal ISSN

Volume Title

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)
The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you.

Research Projects

Organizational Units

Journal Issue

Citation

Mark J. Roe & Joo-Hee Chung, How the Chrysler Reorganization Differed From Prior Practice, 5 J. Legal Analysis 399 (2013).

Research Data

Abstract

Chrysler, a failing auto manufacturer, was reorganized in a controversial chapter 11 in 2009. Financial creditors were paid a quarter of the amount owed them, while other creditors were paid more. The reorganization’s defenders asserted, among other things, that the proceeding and the sale structure was typical of prior practice. To see if this view fits the evidence, we examine all prior large section 363 sales for key financial ratios that can show whether a priority distortion is very unlikely. For example, in a cash sale with the buyer not assuming any debt of the bankrupt, the sale itself cannot ordinarily disrupt standard priorities. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test for these ratios indicates that Chrysler significantly differed from prior practice. It used less cash and the buyer assumed more debt than has been typical. Examining restricted samples, such as prior section 363 sales of firms with high unfunded pension obligations, yields similar results. The evidence here thus does not support the claim that the Chrysler reorganization fit the preexisting pattern of section 363 sales.

Description

Other Available Sources

Keywords

Terms of Use

This article is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Other Posted Material (LAA), as set forth at Terms of Service

Endorsement

Review

Supplemented By

Referenced By

Related Stories