August 13, 2012 10:17 AM
“Nothing," according to Bloomberg.
Bloomberg, which defines itself as "a premier site for business and
financial market news," last night published a story that claims in
the first paragraph: “Sergio Marchionne drives a hard
bargain. After all, the Fiat SpA chief executive officer gained
control of Chrysler Group LLC in 2009 for nothing.”
Yes, it reads “for nothing.” Further down, one can
read: “For Turin, Italy-based Fiat, which took control of
Chrysler in 2009 without paying any cash and by agreeing to share
small-car and powertrain technology...” Technology, i.e.
platforms and powertrains are “nothing.” And further
down the story explains: “By exercising options at a cost of
$1.97 billion and meeting some performance milestones, Fiat has
boosted its ownership stake in Chrysler to 58.5 percent.”
Still it begins with "nothing.”
According to Merriam-Webster (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/nothing)
the definition of “nothing” is: “1: not any
thing; 2: no part; 3: one of no interest, value, or
consequence.” And according to The Free Dictionary (http://www.thefreedictionary.com/nothing)
“nothing” means: “1: No thing; not anything; 2:
No part; no portion; 3: One of no consequence, significance, or
interest; 4: Something that has no existence; 5: Something that has
no quantitative value; zero; 6: One that has no substance or
importance; a nonentity.”
Still, Bloomberg claims there's nothing wrong with the lead.
Bizarre. Unmistakably, Bloomberg went for the easy lead that
reinforces the wrong point of view of those who still think Fiat
got Chrysler for nothing, because technology and access to
Fiat’s international distribution network weren't handed over
like a check. One may wonder whether Bloomberg reporters would
agree describing their work as “nothing.” It’s
not a check, is not cash. Is it?
