Показаны сообщения с ярлыком car politics. Показать все сообщения
Показаны сообщения с ярлыком car politics. Показать все сообщения

Too Late: CfC Money’s Almost Gone. Buying This Weekend? C’mon In!

Cash for ClunkersThe Cash for Clunkers program has surprised a lot of people with its success, but it may be too successful. The Detroit Free Press and others report that its funds are nearly exhausted, “leaving thousands of dealers and consumers in the lurch.” And yet, President Obama’s press secretary, Robert Gibbs, said yesterday,

If you were planning on going to buy a car this weekend, using this program, this program continues to run. If you meet the requirements of the program, the certificates will be honored.

Who’s on first here?

Lawmakers and the administration are making a desperate search today to find more funds before Congress adjourns—tomorrow. The NHTSA (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration), which runs the CARS (CfC) program, said that 22,798 vehicles worth about $96 million had been sold. They also said that the “vast majority” of deals were being rejected for incomplete or ineligible paperwork. NADA, the National Automobile Dealers Association, reported some 25,000 deals (13 trades per store) had been submitted but not yet approved by NHTSA.

The upshot seems to be that dealers may have sold, or agreed to sell, more than the 250,000 cars and trucks the plan has funds for. Ouch. One consequence is that dealers have invested millions in promoting the program this weekend—for nothing. We know how all-important recess is, but you Congresspeople had better get on the stick. We must assume the feds aren’t going to leave drivers and dealers holding the bag because they screwed up.

1998 Isuzu Rodeo

1998 Isuzu Rodeo (not the McGowans')

If it continues, the CARS program ought to be revised so it can live up to its original premise, which was not just providing stimulus to the car industry but getting truly dirty cars off the road. (Wikipedia has a good, up-to-date history here.) We’ve read too many stories like this one: Patrick McGowan and his wife told Bloomberg they

wouldn’t have traded in their 1998 Isuzu Motors Ltd. Rodeo for a new car if it weren’t for the $4,500 rebate they got through the clunkers program and the additional $2,000 rebate from Hyundai [for a new Elantra]… “Our car had 140,000 miles on it,” he said. “We in a million years weren’t going to buy a new car.”

How about, finally, getting the mileage and age qualifications straightened out so the program will really remove stinkers from the highway, instead of vehicles that are only marginal? If the government put money into a really effective (and lots less bureaucratic) CfC, we could all cheer.

Do you think the CARS/CfC program should be given more funding and continue? Or should the government find a more effective way to promote its environmental and economic goals?

—jgoods

UPDATE
Big front-page news this afternoon: The House approved $2 billion to extend the CfC program. Funds will come from a set-aside approved for the Department of Energy. But don’t start dancing just yet: The Senate, still in session next week, must take up the matter, and all are expecting “spirited debate.”

There is still plenty of unhappiness among dealers, some of which echoes our points made above. See Adam Lee’s report to Green Inc., the energy/environment/business blog of the NY Times. His remarks are spot on, according to others I’ve heard.





Related posts:



Related posts:



Ford in a Bind

Manny, Moe, and Jack

Manny, Moe and Jack

All the recent talk about Ford has been glowing and positive: how much better its product lineup is than GM’s or Chrysler’s, how smart it was not to take the bailout, how much better positioned it is for the future. Well, I wonder. Ford does have an edge in product and clearly has avoided the stigma of bankruptcy.

On the other counts, there are big uncertainties looming. The Detroit News interviewed Ford’s Treasurer, Neil Schloss, who noted that the company was “at a cost disadvantage” in raising capital for its lending unit, Ford Credit Group. That is, since the government granted GMAC, GM’s lending arm, bank status, it can borrow money—and hence finance car purchases—much more cheaply than Ford: 2.2 percent versus 8 percent on recent debt transactions.

Well, that’s a very large disadvantage. Bloomberg had another way of putting it: “In recent competing bond offerings, Ford paid $107.5 million more than GMAC for every $1 billion it borrowed.” That makes for a very un-level playing field. Yet Treasurer Schloss maintains that having an in-house finance company can offset this.

There are significant benefits from an operating perspective to being able to have the credit guys and the marketing and sales guys working right next to each other and agreeing on the right way to approach the market and what the right incentive levels are. There are also benefits associated with the consumer and how we treat them.

As a former marketing person, I must say I don’t know what the hell he’s talking about. You have to have the marketing and finance guys under one roof? Why? Ford’s phones don’t work? What consumer benefits is he referring to?

The conclusion to me is that Ford made a big mistake in not taking government financing, even though it is the healthiest, right now, of the Big Three. Or should we call it the Big One? But look what has to happen:

  • Ford must bear the immense cost of restructuring on its own, and it will take far longer than the GM and Chrysler rebuilds.
  • With bankruptcy, GM and Chrysler will eliminate over 2,000 dealers with the stroke of a pen; Ford will be stuck with more than 3,700 dealers who are bound by state franchises.
  • Finally, Ford’s debt burden is over $30 billion long-term, which isn’t going away any time soon. GM and Chrysler will be getting some $62 billion in government investment.

Looking at the financial side, I don’t think the company has much to cheer about.

Can Ford make it out of this hole on product alone? Give us your thoughts.

—jgoods



Related posts:



Related posts:



General Motors Sinks… But Will It Survive?

gm-sinks

And now, a brief ode to General Motors as its day of reckoning has arrived.

For nearly a hundred years GM was the epitome of American manufacturing and extravagance. It built cars with huge fins, dripped cars in vats of chrome, and gave the world the Corvette. 

GM was the Titanic of the corporate world: huge, formidable, and utterly unsinkable.

Now, just barely into its second hundred years, the company has hit an iceberg and is going down. An event that would’ve been called laughable a decade ago, that would have been downright inconceivable in GM’s heyday, is happening today.

Part of GM’s iceberg was avoidable and could have been seen up ahead had someone taken the time to notice it. Outrageous union benefits, vehicle inefficiencies, bad management, and the Chevy Vega all conspired with the oil crisis and an economic downfall to crush the once mighty GM.

GM is actually lucky it had a rescue ship in the form of the U.S. government, or the company would be history by now.  

With the United States propping up the badly hobbled General, there is hope to rebuild. Former GM CEO Bob Lutz said the new GM will be a smaller, leaner powerhouse. I agree.

The days of arrogance and extravagance are long over in Detroit, and I sincerely hope that Mr. Lutz is correct and GM’s ship can be trimmed, righted, and saved through this bankruptcy.

Here’s to you, General.

Do you think General Motors will pull through bankruptcy and become a stronger, leaner company?

-tgriffith



Related posts:



Related posts:



A New Way for Car Dealers to Make Money

Buy the car, but watch out for extra fees

Buy the car, but watch out for extra fees

Here’s an example of car dealers getting special treatment in these hard economic times:

The legislature in my state, Washington, has approved a new law allowing dealers to triple the $50 “document fee” they charge customers.

The law has one purpose: to help out struggling auto dealers by increasing a fee that goes straight into their pockets. In my opinion, it’s another hurdle for struggling consumers who need to buy a new car.

The prime sponsor of the bill is state Rep. Dean Takko, who told lawmakers at a recent meeting,

They’re hurting, and I don’t mind giving them a hand if this is something that they really need.

Hey Dean, if you’re going to help auto dealers, why not extend your generous helping hand to all the other struggling businesses? I know espresso stand owners are hurting right now, too. So are newspapers and radio stations and home builders. How about a special law allowing them to charge more, too?

This isn’t a law that will help out dealers as much as it will further gouge the consumer. The law is asking us to prop up a sagging industry by throwing an additional hundred bucks into the dealer’s pocket and getting nothing in return. If buying a car from a dealer isn’t enough to keep that dealer afloat, let it fail, and let the stronger ones survive.

There is good news included in this law, though it’s buried: The state requires dealers to notify consumers in writing that the document fee is negotiable. Problem is, the notification is made during the signing process, after the deal is made. 

Fellow cargurus, watch out for similar laws popping up in states across the country, and if you are in the market for a car, make sure you negotiate on the dealer documentation fee. Pay what your state charges the dealer to file your paperwork, and no more.

Do you think dealers should be able to increase their documentation fees in hard times?

-tgriffith



Related posts:



Related posts:



U.S. Auto Sales Lag China’s for Third Month in a Row

chery-carsThe Chinese are moving into the passing lane, making it only a matter of time before they overtake the U.S. as the world’s largest auto market. March sales may well set a record for them, and the winds of change are blowing strong.

China sold 1.03 million cars last month; Americans bought 657,735, down 37% from March 2008 sales of 1.36 million. At three months’ duration, this sales shift looks like a real trend. One reason China’s market remains strong is that its government takes an aggressive role in promoting sales of small, fuel-efficient cars, light trucks, and minivans, especially in rural areas. The U.S. has been slow in this regard, as it has been in recognizing how desperate the auto industry’s situation is.

To counter some of the bad news, GM announced it sold 137,004 vehicles in China in March, up 24.6 percent from the year before. With a fairly wide product group, GM predicts it will double its sales to more than 2 million a year by 2014.

Brilliance BC3

Brilliance BC3

Other companies are eagerly pursuing the Chinese market, which consists mostly of small, regional manufacturers, because their home markets are miserable. Daimler is launching its Smart minicar in China this week, and we will see a host of new cars debut at the Shanghai Auto Show, April 20-28, according to an AP story today.

Of course, the U.S. and Chinese markets are very different, as we’ve indicated, and the per-vehicle profits in China are smaller. But these numbers should scare the pants off even the staunchest Detroit boosters. American automakers not only have to go after an entirely new foreign market now, but must reconstitute, somehow, the utility, desirability, and value of their products for the U.S.

What do you know about Chinese vehicles? Has anybody driven one? Is the quality there?

—jgoods



Related posts:



Related posts: