Hi,

My apologies to those who work for the big three auto companies. This is not personal but motivated by how badly the Big 3 played their attempted grab at $25 B for CAFE retooling. It comes from this editorial:

What pisses me off is "$25 B.," the exact same amount authorized to support retooling to meet CAFE standards. Had any other number come in, say $30 B or $20 B, I would have let it pass but "$25 B" is exactly the amount authorized to support meeting CAFE standards. Now the "Big 3" are saying, they can't even stay in business unless we take off the CAFE standards attached to this "$25 B."

Well I'm of the opinion we should say, "Thank you for the heads up!" and offer this counter proposal:

• Go into Chapter 11 as soon as possible and identify which banks you want to "borrow" money to stay in operation.
• Secretary Paulson will direct part of the $700 B. authorized for banks so they can loan you whatever money you need to stay in business.
• Whoever survives to apply for the $25 B. retooling will get the share you were planning to get.

Now everyone is happy but this latest article adds another piece of circumstantial evidence about who provided CNW Marketing with their junk science, "Ann Arbor-based Center for Automotive Research."

CNW Marketing dressed up their nonsense report, "Dust-to-Dust," with a lot of faux data tables well beyond their ordinary area of expertise. CNW Marketing interviews dealers and some customers and don't track manufacturing. The "Harbor Report" group covers manufacturing and they have done nothing to support the bogus claims of "Dust-to-Dust." But "Ann Arbor-based Center for Automotive Research" would be exactly the type of group who could dream up the bogus tables in "Dust-to-Dust."

For a long time, I've suspected there had to be an organization that handles and organizes hybrid skepticism. There had to be some way that the "Big 3" could collaborate in the public forum and insulate themselves from being 'the bad guy.' David Cole's organization, "Center for Automotive Research," is the perfect front.

Understand that I don't believe even for a nanosecond that if "Center for Automotive Research" disappeared tomorrow there wouldn't be three more that suddenly spring up. But knowing who they are and what they are about helps research where hybrid skeptic reports are likely to have come from. Never ignore your 'honorable competition.'

In summary, the "Big 3" can seek immediate relief with Chapter 11. This will give them a way to tap the $700 B in Paulson's hands by a bank to launder the money. They have less than 60 days to act before a new administration, one not in their pocket, comes into office. The clock is ticking and at the rate Paulson is giving the money away, running out.

Bob Wilson

After April 3, use e-mail to contact me:

In my view the Big 3 lost touch with their consumers a long time ago. 0% financing, rebates up the ying yang, employee pricing, longer warrantees, gas for $1.99 - only prolonged the obvious, that they were not selling vehicles because of quality. The Big 3 was selling vehicles because it was "perceived as a good deal." The good deal went sour when there were recalls and the American public realized you get what you pay for. This has been going on for years.

I have a simple case in point as to GM’s lack of customer focus and poor accounting. I have been trying to get an answer to a question I posed to GM for the past 18 months.

Question: How many 2007 Saturn Hybrid Vues have been sold? You would think that would be a simple question with a numerical answer. No one from the local Saturn Shop to the Customer Hotline to GM's headquarters could furnish me with an exact number. I have searched the web and could not find the number either. If GM can’t tell me how many Hybrid Vues were sold, how are they going to handle their share of 25 Billion Dollars?

I have given up entering data into Green Hybrid as the database has not been updated since 2008.
My individual tanks are now being tracked below.

If the Big Three go into bankruptcy, there is the potential that new car buyers will view the stigma of bankruptcy as the potential for a warranty and service that evaporates overnight down the road without warning. People wouldn't buy from them because they were in bankruptcy proceedings. However, since they aren't making sales anyway, I can't see that they have anything to lose by trying bankruptcy.

If GM's dire warnings are as dire as they say, then the $25B would seem to only stop their bleeding for 12.5 more months. I would suspect the car buying public will be even LESS likely to buy a new car in December 2009 than November 2008. People are keeping what they have and riding out what they appear to believe will be several dark years.

Once the giving to the Big Three begins, I doubt $25B, $50B or even $200B will save them.

Long ago, GM shoulda cut loose more of their Oldsmobuicklines. Stop making clones. Start making a difference.

More smaller, fuel efficient cars.
More hybrids.
Better hybrids.
PHEVs.
EVs.

Not necessarily in that order.

Chevy Volt or Focus EV?

Decisions, decisions.

I understand the CEO's flew in to Washington in their Private jets.
As they step off the planes, are we to believe them when they hold out their tin cups?

This is either pure stupidity on their part, or simply overconfident posturing. I bet the latter. They think they can just waltz into DC, plead their case, and pick up a $25B check. I don't know the right answer, but they sure played up their "dire need" piss-poorly.

Steve

STOP terrorism - Drive a HYBRID

Vehicles:
350 miles a week ------------ 2006 HCH II, Magnetic Pearl, w/NAVI (born on May 25, 2006)
350 miles a month ---------- 2003 Mazda Tribute ES-V6
350 miles a year (for now) - 1986 Mercedes 560SL

I wonder if like AIG, the first thing they'll do with that much needed $$ is to pay out hundreds of millions in overdue bonuses?

let them go bankrupt, they can reorganize and struggle like everyone else.

http://test5477.blogspot.com

If they go BK, and they have to liquidate, then the sound thing for Congress to do might be offer up loan guarantees to a company willing to buy the pieces, use the mass production facilities, and build something that makes a HUGE difference. I mean if we're going to pay for a bailout, I don't want it spent just so someone else can meet new CAFE standards in 2020.

Tesla and EEstor come to mind.

Chevy Volt or Focus EV?

Decisions, decisions.

Question: How many 2007 Saturn Hybrid Vues have been sold? [/quote]

2007 Hybrid Electric Passenger Vehicles Sales
Ford Escape11,444 (through June 2007)
Honda Accord3,405Honda Civic32,575Honda Insight3 Lexus RX400h17,291Lexus LS 600h541 (September/October/November Sales Only)Nissan Altima7209Mercury Mariner868 (May and June 2007 sales only)Saturn VUE3,969 (through May 2007 only)Toyota Camry49,508 (through November 2007 only)Toyota Highlander 16,284 (January through July 2007 and November 2007 only)Toyota Prius181,221Total for the vehicles above: 324,318

2008 Hybrid Electric Passenger Vehicle Sales by Model (through October 2008)
Chevy Tahoe/GMC Yukon Hybrids:
2,260 (June/July/August/October only)Chevy Malibu Hybrid: 1,357 (June/July/August/October only)Honda Accord Hybrid: 197Honda Civic Hybrid: 29,218Lexus 600h:
330 (through March only)Lexus 400h: 13,113Nissan Altima Hybrid: 4,242 (through May only)Saturn Aura Hybrid:
107 (June/July/August/October only)Saturn Vue Hybrid: 1410 (June/July/August/October only)Toyota Camry Hybrid: 42,210Toyota Highlander Hybrid: 17,594Toyota Prius: 142,365Cadillac Escalade 2-Mode Hybrid:231 (August/October only)Year to Date Total for vehicles above: 254,634
Notes:
General Motors YTD Hybrid Sales through October: 10,549
Toyota/Lexus YTD Hybrid Sales through October: 216,760
_______

___________________________________________ ________________

2005 AWD Escape Hybrid
Best Interstate tank trip MPG 39.02 (scangauge II) for 402 miles on I-70, 10.3 gallons used over mostly flat terrain. Aug. 2007

Best Interstate tank trip E30 MPG 34.6 for 271 miles along I-80 in Indiana and Ohio. May 2008

Best multiple road tank trip E30 MPG 36.2 for 202 miles in Southwestern Pa. July 2008.

Making it a little more readable.

Bob Wilson

After April 3, use e-mail to contact me:

I think we should change the bankruptcy laws. If a company declares bankruptcy, but is "too big to fail", the government should have the option to keep the company running. The main idea is to continue operations that are "too big to fail" without rewarding the old executives, board, or stockholders for causing the failure.

The old stock would be canceled; the old executives would be fired for cause; new stock would be issued (to the treasury); and the treasury would inject capital and hire new executives to continue the operation. The new executives would have to clean up the mess. They might decide to sell off or shut down subsidiaries; discontinue unprofitable products; change the marketing and product-development direction; seek a merger partner; or other difficult decisions. Their main goals would be to contain the financial damage, and to continue employment of as many employees as they can.