The Bailout - DPChallenge Forums

And anonther reason to get folks back to work

02/24/2009 02:28:57 PM · #1

karmat

Apple iPhone 7

Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0L USM

02/23/2009 04:25:34 PM · #2

Originally posted by GeneralE:

Originally posted by Flash:
Ford Fusion Hybrid tops Prius - twice

That's nice, if a bit late in the game.
Originally posted by Cited Article:

"Ford has pulled off a game changer with this 2010 model, creating a high-mpg family hauler that's fun to drive," they write. "Nothing about the leather-lined test car, optioned up from its $27,995 base price to $32,555, seemed economy minded except for the mileage readings. On that score, the Fusion topped the others, turning in a 34-mpg score card for the overall 300-mile test run."

My 2001 Prius is getting over 43MPG combined milage, and does better (about 46MPG) in the warmer weather. 34MPG doesn't seem all that great to me, though from the description the car may be considerably bigger/heavier than a Prius. But I wonder how they could manage to drive a Prius to get under 34MPG -- that seems kinda suspicious to me, since the rated (gov't estimated) milage for a new Prius is 50MPG.

I really do hope that that the (former) Big Three get it together to make some affordable, reliable, clean and economical vehicles before they collapse; I agree that this is some encouraging news.

What I miss is my 1993 Geo metro that averaged 48-53 mpg (in hilly, mountainous terrain -- no interstate travel for me, generally).

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

02/23/2009 02:33:40 PM · #3

Originally posted by Flash:

Ford Fusion Hybrid tops Prius - twice

That's nice, if a bit late in the game.

Originally posted by Cited Article:

"Ford has pulled off a game changer with this 2010 model, creating a high-mpg family hauler that's fun to drive," they write. "Nothing about the leather-lined test car, optioned up from its $27,995 base price to $32,555, seemed economy minded except for the mileage readings. On that score, the Fusion topped the others, turning in a 34-mpg score card for the overall 300-mile test run."

My 2001 Prius is getting over 43MPG combined milage, and does better (about 46MPG) in the warmer weather. 34MPG doesn't seem all that great to me, though from the description the car may be considerably bigger/heavier than a Prius. But I wonder how they could manage to drive a Prius to get under 34MPG -- that seems kinda suspicious to me, since the rated (gov't estimated) milage for a new Prius is 50MPG.

I really do hope that that the (former) Big Three get it together to make some affordable, reliable, clean and economical vehicles before they collapse; I agree that this is some encouraging news.

Ford Fusion Hybrid tops Prius - twice

02/23/2009 02:16:48 PM · #4

LoudDog

Canon EOS-350D Rebel XT

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM

02/17/2009 10:14:38 PM · #5

that $13,400,000,000 we gave GM to bail them out? Yeah, they need $30,000,000,000 more or they'll go broke by March.

And oh yeah, they have not been able to renegotiate their UAW contracts or bond holders either, but they double pinky swear they'll keep working on it.

FAILURE

Now I really want to buy a GM!

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

01/28/2009 04:31:22 PM · #6

Originally posted by Spazmo99:

The problem is that the proposal would allow for 50 different standards and states themselves work together even less well than their Congressional representatives do in Wash D.C.

Which proposal would do that? The current proposal (EPA waiver) as I understand it is for California and some 14-17 other states to get a waiver from the Federal regulatory limits in order to provide their own, uniform, stricter limit. All other states would still fall under the Federal Guidelines. That's two standards, or one if they do the sensible thing and settle on making all vehicles meet the stricter guidelines, which should further lower the cost/unit production and maintenance costs.

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

01/28/2009 03:12:40 PM · #7

Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by Spazmo99:
...navigating the requirements of 50 different standards would be mind boggling.

For that very reason, it's unlikely that states would ever have 50 different standards. The current issue centered on California and 12 or so states that wanted to adopt that state's proposed standard since the EPA itself was unable or unwilling to get tough. It's in the states' interest to adopt a common standard rather than research, debate and legislate independent directives.

The problem is that the proposal would allow for 50 different standards and states themselves work together even less well than their Congressional representatives do in Wash D.C.

scalvert

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

01/28/2009 02:52:59 PM · #8

Originally posted by Spazmo99:

...navigating the requirements of 50 different standards would be mind boggling.

For that very reason, it's unlikely that states would ever have 50 different standards. The current issue centered on California and 12 or so states that wanted to adopt that state's proposed standard since the EPA itself was unable or unwilling to get tough. It's in the states' interest to adopt a common standard rather than research, debate and legislate independent directives.

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

01/28/2009 02:44:22 PM · #9

Originally posted by scalvert:

More likely: they'd just engineer for the most restrictive state, thereby meeting standards for the rest, and one or two other standards. That's how it's already worked with California emissions for years.

It's entirely possible for one or more states to set standards that would conflict with each other or lead to a significant increase in vehicle cost.

Also, designing to the most restrictive of two requirements is one thing, but simply navigating the requirements of 50 different standards would be mind boggling.

Message edited by author 2009-01-28 14:45:28.

scalvert

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

01/28/2009 02:38:18 PM · #10

01/28/2009 02:34:46 PM · #11

I'm all for improving economy and reducing emissions, but I don't think that letting the states set their own emissions standards for automobiles is a smart move. Now, instead of engineering 1 emissions system for the US, automakers will potentially have to engineer 50 different systems, one for each state.

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

01/28/2009 02:31:35 PM · #12

Originally posted by Flash:

GM Leads in Fuel-Efficiency in Canada � The recent release of Natural Resources Canada�s EnerGuide Fuel Consumption Ratings confirms that GM of Canada offers more cars and crossovers that achieve 7L / 100 km or better on the highway than any other automaker.

�GM is a leader in the Canadian marketplace with a broad range of fuel-efficient vehicles for customers,� said Marc Comeau, vice president, sales, service and marketing for GM Canada. �GM uses advanced technologies to reduce fuel consumption across our entire vehicle line-up. We offer more hybrid models than any other automaker and are pushing forward with the revolutionary Chevrolet Volt and hydrogen fuel cells.�

GM vehicles that achieve 7L / 100 km or better on the highway include:

Chevrolet: Aveo and Aveo 5, Cobalt, Cobalt SS Turbo, Cobalt XFE, HHR and HHR Panel, HHR SS Turbo and HHR Panel SS Turbo, Malibu, Malibu Hybrid, Impala

Pontiac: G3 Wave and G3 Wave 5, G5, G5 XFE, G6, Solstice GXP, Vibe and Vibe GT

Saturn: Astra, Aura, Aura Hybrid, Sky Turbo, Vue Hybrid

Saab: 9-3 Sport Sedan, 9-3 Sportcombi

Personally, I'm waiting for Ford's new Fiesta.

I just hope it's available here with the 65mpg diesel engine.

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

01/28/2009 01:51:24 PM · #13

Originally posted by Flash:

We offer more hybrid models than any other automaker and are pushing forward with the revolutionary Chevrolet Volt and hydrogen fuel cells.�

GM vehicles that achieve 7L / 100 km or better on the highway include:

Chevrolet: Aveo and Aveo 5, Cobalt, Cobalt SS Turbo, Cobalt XFE, HHR and HHR Panel, HHR SS Turbo and HHR Panel SS Turbo, Malibu, Malibu Hybrid, Impala

Pontiac: G3 Wave and G3 Wave 5, G5, G5 XFE, G6, Solstice GXP, Vibe and Vibe GT

Saturn: Astra, Aura, Aura Hybrid, Sky Turbo, Vue Hybrid

Saab: 9-3 Sport Sedan, 9-3 Sportcombi

Good for them, though perhaps that's part of their problem -- they try to offer too darned many models which have marginal differences. Yeah, yeah, "consumer choice" is important, but I think they could offer half as many different vehicles without severly limiting choice of size, style and features, gaining economies of scale in production, and probably increased reliability through greater standardization of parts and service.

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

01/28/2009 12:50:43 PM · #14

Art Roflmao

Canon EOS-6D Mark II

12/30/2008 06:22:47 PM · #15

Someone emailed this to me:

For those of us that were/are just a little confused by the intricacies of the recent government �bail out�, here is a simpler perspective on its structure.

Young Chuck in Montana bought a horse from a farmer for $100.

The farmer agreed to deliver the horse the next day.

The next day he drove up and said, 'Sorry son, but I have some bad news, the horse died.'
Chuck replied, 'Well, then just give me my money back.'

The farmer said, 'Can't do that. I went and spent it already'
Chuck said, 'Ok, then, just bring me the dead horse.'
The farmer asked, 'What ya gonna do with him?
Chuck said, 'I'm going to raffle him off.'
The farmer said, 'You can't raffle off a dead horse!'

Chuck said, 'Sure I can, Watch me.

I just won't tell anybody he's dead.'

A month later, the farmer met up with Chuck and asked,

�What happened with that dead horse?'
Chuck said, 'I raffled him off.

I sold 500 tickets at two dollars apiece and made a profit of $998.'
The farmer said, 'Didn't anyone complain?'
Chuck said, 'Just the guy who won.

So I gave him his two dollars back.'

Chuck grew up and works now for the government.

He was the one who figured out how to "bail us out".

pamelasue

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

Tamron SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di for Canon

12/11/2008 10:07:23 AM · #16

Bravo ... PERFECTLY STATED! Thanks for posting, Flash!!!

Tamron SP AF 90mm f/2.8 Di for Nikon

12/11/2008 09:49:24 AM · #17

Based on my observations - this isn't too far off.

At Witz' End: What Auto CEOs Should Have Said
Did it occur to anyone else that those oh-so-painful auto CEO/government hearings should have been the other way around?

Instead of the heads of America's three remaining automakers groveling, begging and enduring live public floggings trying to sell their case for government loans to get them past the global economic crisis and credit freeze that government greed, corruption and incompetence has created, shouldn't they have been vein-popping outraged and angry? Shouldn't they have pointed accusatory fingers at that sorry collection of arrogant, auto-ignorant Senators and Congressmen who got them into this mess and demanded their assistance?

Shouldn't they have looked those pompous public-trough pinheads straight in the face and demanded to know why investment firms, banks and big insurance get hundreds of billions of taxpayer bailout dollars no questions asked while what's left of America's once-mighty manufacturing muscle begs for loans totaling 1/28 of that initial $700 billion Wall Street bailout? Where were the public humiliation hearings and newly viable business plans for those guys?

Here is what I'll bet those long-suffering auto CEOs wanted to say, but couldn't:

"You ignorant morons! How dare you accuse us of building cars nobody wants? We sold 8.5 million vehicles in the US last year and millions more around the world. GM still handily outsells Toyota here, Ford outsells Honda and Nissan, and Chrysler sells more than Nissan and Hyundai combined. H ow many of our new cars have you driven lately? How many quality surveys and plant productivity reports have you reviewed? Have you bothered to check your own EPA's fuel economy ratings?

"Have you paid any attention in the last several years as we've turned our companies upside down, closed dozens of plants, shed hundreds of thousands of hard-working people who did nothing to deserve it, canceled slow-selling models and spent billions of hard-earned dollars redesigning the rest? Are you idiots even aware that we renegotiated our union contracts last year to make our US labor and health-care costs fully competitive by 2010?

"Would you recognize a good business plan if one smacked you upside the head? Have any of you ever run a business, made a business decision or even held a real job? Is there any more dysfunctional organization on the planet, any that more desperately needs a new business plan, than the US Congress? Let's compare our public approval ratings to yours .

"You scold us for using private aircraft? We run global companies flying people, parts and equipment all over the world every day. We use private planes for security and productivity and cost savings over commercial alternatives. If it were not cost effective, we would not do it, and we've been doing a lot less of it lately. Tell us, Ms. Pelosi, how much does that big private 757-200 of yours cost taxpayers to fly you home and back between your tough 3-day weeks?

"For decades, your national energy policy has been summed up by two words: 'cheap gas.' Now you want to punish us for building the big, capable, comfortable vehicles Americans wanted to take advantage of that policy...and for not building millions more smaller, more fuel-efficient cars that, until recently, almost no one wanted, and that we can't make a buck on if we build them here thanks to the high business costs you've imposed upon us through the years.

"You have blocked every avenue of domestic e xploration and construction that could lead to eventual energy independence, preferring instead to pump hundreds of billions of dollars overseas to purchase the energy Americans need, much of it from countries that are not our friends. You have piled billions of dollars of unrecoverable costs on us with excessive taxation, overkill regulation and relentless litigation that our off-shore competitors do not have to bear. Then you have rolled out the red carpet to predatory, low-cost foreign competitors who come here to take our market and pump hundreds of millions more dollars out of this country.

"Is there any other country fortunate enough to have an automotive industry that does not support, protect and nourish it in every possible way? We are the only nation on earth too blind and stupid to recognize and treasure the enormous economic and national security advantages of having its own healthy, prosperous auto industry and manufacturing base.

"Now you have passed an enormously expensive new regulation requiring 40 percent higher corporate average fuel economy in hopes of someday reducing the less than 0.2 percent of global human-sourced CO2 attributable to US light vehicles. That will cost us an estimated $100 billion, and even if you believe that is really worth doing at such a cost, where are we going to get that kind of money? Talk about unfunded mandates!

"With recent resizings and restructurings and our new labor contracts, we were well on our ways to full financial competitiveness and profitability. We could have survived and the sudden $4 gas explosion - not our fault - that shifted buyer demand overnight from larger, more profitable vehicles to small unprofitable ones. We have millions of highly desirable, much more fuel-efficient small cars and engines in the pipeline for 2010 and beyond.

"Then came your mortgage meltdown and fast-frozen credit crisis, which no one in this credit-driven business can survive un aided for long: not us, not our suppliers, not our many thousands of independent dealers, not even our most cash-rich foreign competitors. They, too, are asking their governments for assistance. Will they get it? Of course! No other nation will stand idly by and watch its auto industry die.

"There was no end of election rhetoric about creating new jobs. How about saving several million of the ones we have? Can any of you begin to understand how this industry is a huge, fragile, interdependent house of cards? If GM should fail, or declare Chapter 11, so will most of its 3,690 suppliers, beginning with the 2,000 in the US that operate 4,550 facilities in 46 states. Since most also supply key components to everyone else, that will bring down all of us, including US transplant production. Don't believe us? Ask Toyota.

"Vehicle assembly, engine, transmission and parts plants nationwide will shut down. Have you seen a plant town whose plant has died? It's a jobless ghos t to wn whose out-of-work residents, including owners and employees of the small businesses that depended on plant workers' incomes, can't afford to move because their homes � like their hopes and dreams � are worthless. How many of those communities will be in your states and districts? US dealers of all brands, with no new cars, credit or credit-worthy customers, will drop like flies. Without once lucrative auto advertising, many media will shrink and some will die? The predicted initial loss of 3 million jobs will be just the beginning. Can you spell depression?

"Yes, we have lost a lot of market share. Where did you think all those millions of cars and trucks our foreign competitors import and assemble here in taxpayer-subsidized plants in cheap-labor states would be sold, and out of whose hides did you think they would come?

"Yes, we have made mistakes, some bad products and bad business decisions in the past. And so has every one of our competitors. We are entir ely d ifferent companies today with new leadership and new priorities. We have wide varieties of high quality, high fuel efficiency, highly desirable new products that Americans, as they get to know them, absolutely do want to buy. Why continue to punish us, and the millions of incredibly dedicated, hard-working people at all levels who still depend on us to feed their families, for the sins of our predecessors?

"Why punish the entire country and millions in other countries as well? If you can think of any good reason, we would like to hear it. And don't come back at us with your usual name-calling, finger-pointing, blame-shifting, uninformed opinions, decades-old perceptions and self-serving, grandstanding rhetoric. We have offered our business plans and all the facts behind how we got here and why we need and deserve to survive and prosper for the good of this country and every citizen in it.

"You know full well that this life-threatening position you have put us in to is entirely your fault, not ours, and that our future viability depends completely on you. We're anxiously awaiting your business plan for guiding this country out of the economic morass you have created, beginning with the bridge loans we desperately need."

Award-winning automotive writer Gary Witzenburg has been writing about automobiles, auto people and the auto industry for 21 years. A former auto engineer, race driver and advanced technology vehicle development manager, his work has appeared in a wide variety of national magazines including The Robb Report, Playboy, Popular Mechanics, Car and Driver, Road & Track, Motor Trend, Autoweek and Automobile Quarterly and has authored eight automotive books. He is currently contributing regularly to Kelley Blue Book (www.kbb.com), AutoMedia.com< /A>, W ard's Auto World and Motor Trend's Truck Trend and is a North American Car and Truck of the Year juror

JMart

Nikon D80

11/24/2008 04:06:24 PM · #18

Originally posted by photodude:

Their restructuring success would be based on two things that a bankruptcy judge alone could provide;

One small problem everyone keeps ignoring; A bankruptcy judge can not provide the lost %70 of consumers that say they would not consider purchasing from an automaker going through bankruptcy. That problem far outweighs what a bankruptcy judge could provide.

vxpra

Pentax K100D

Pentax DA 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 AF

11/24/2008 12:53:27 PM · #19

Looking forward for a moment. Has anybody else noticed the next shoe dangling (and likely to drop in the next six months).

Consumer credit cards?

For the past two years credit card companies have been increasing fees and rates on customers to increase their cash flow (In no small part to try to offset losses in their mortgage lending divisions). Every month more and more credit cards are maxed out. Many by families that due to job loss/slow downs, gas prices- and who knows how many other factors- have been forced to use them for daily needs, like groceries or gas. Several months ago BOA decided to start jacking up interest rates on people that their research showed to be "high risk." Many of these people have never missed a payment, never went over their limit, but due to factors, such as active accounts and percent of available balance, they were classified as high risk. Many more banks are now following BOA's lead and doing the same thing. I've read several places where BOA has expanded their definition of high risk and will raise rates and fees on up to 20% of additional accounts in the next several months.

The entity that now owns my employer sent out an internal memo last week that estimated credit card defaults will increase 30-40% in the next six months. This is also expected to increase mortgage defaults (again) as people struggle to pay their credit cards because they view the credit cards as the only way they can provide their family with daily needs (groceries). BTW: This same research team in 2005 predicted the housing bubble bursting. They missed it a little- they had the bubble lasting until December 2008.

Edit because apparently I slept too much in high school english.

Message edited by author 2008-11-24 12:55:19.

11/23/2008 10:57:31 PM · #20

Originally posted by photodude:

Originally posted by Spazmo99:

Originally posted by posthumous:

Originally posted by Spazmo99:
You do realize that even the foreign car makers support the loans to the D3, right? That their survival, at least in the U.S. market, depends on it just as much as the D3.

I like this debate. It makes me feel like I'm holding onto 25 billions dollars and deciding whom to give it to. :)

Tough beans, foreign car makers.

Hmm, I did read a column by your buddy Krugman where he says that while you'd be hard pressed to find a less deserving group to provide emergency funding to, it's highly likely that one and possibly all three would never emerge from bankruptcy and that would likely destroy the D3 as a consequence severely cripple the nation's economy in the process. The main reason being is that the credit markets are frozen which would eliminate their ability to restructure under Chapter 11.

Their restructuring success would be based on two things that a bankruptcy judge alone could provide; voiding the current labor contract and no longer having to pay retirement medical (those folks will just have to get by with Medicare like everyone else) and jobs bank, and being able to shut useless divisions (Pontiac, Buick, Mercury, etc) without having to pay tens of billions to disenfranchised dealers. That would bring their cost structure down and they could begin to use some of the revenue they earn to actually develop modern product. Its not like they dont all sell a hell of a lot of cars, it just costs them way too much to make them.

Their success would also be contingent on their ability to borrow to pay their suppliers and other creditors in the interim so they could continue to operate. As soon as they start missing payments to key suppliers, no one will give them 90 or 120 day payment terms and the dominoes start to fall and they wind up with Ch 7 and the company gets sold piece by piece. A bankruptcy judge can only affect the terms of existing debts, he cannot compel other companies to continue doing business with a company in Ch11.

posthumous

Canon EOS-40D

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

11/23/2008 10:18:11 PM · #21

Originally posted by Spazmo99:

Originally posted by posthumous:

Originally posted by Spazmo99:
You do realize that even the foreign car makers support the loans to the D3, right? That their survival, at least in the U.S. market, depends on it just as much as the D3.

I like this debate. It makes me feel like I'm holding onto 25 billions dollars and deciding whom to give it to. :)

Tough beans, foreign car makers.

Hmm, I did read a column by your buddy Krugman where he says that while you'd be hard pressed to find a less deserving group to provide emergency funding to, it's highly likely that one and possibly all three would never emerge from bankruptcy and that would likely destroy the D3 as a consequence severely cripple the nation's economy in the process. The main reason being is that the credit markets are frozen which would eliminate their ability to restructure under Chapter 11.

I defer to my buddy on matters of macroeconomics... (but now I'm reading this book about black swans...)

photodude

11/23/2008 10:11:32 PM · #22

Originally posted by Spazmo99:

Their restructuring success would be based on two things that a bankruptcy judge alone could provide; voiding the current labor contract and no longer having to pay retirement medical (those folks will just have to get by with Medicare like everyone else) and jobs bank, and being able to shut useless divisions (Pontiac, Buick, Mercury, etc) without having to pay tens of billions to disenfranchised dealers. That would bring their cost structure down and they could begin to use some of the revenue they earn to actually develop modern product. Its not like they dont all sell a hell of a lot of cars, it just costs them way too much to make them.