So now, without referring ONCE to GM's point blank denial of the Wall Street Journal article claiming the automaker was considering chopping brands and firing bureaucrats, The Detroit News reports that GM IS "undertaking an in-depth review of its product portfolio that could include eliminating or selling a brand." "A" brand or "some" brands? Who knows? But according to "a source familiar with the plans"– which could be you by now– this whole kerfuffle will end-up being nothing more than a damp squib. The "strategic review' will "most likely will result in the Detroit automaker purging overlapping models and shifting its emphasis to more fuel-efficient cars." Whew! And there we were thinking something radical might go down. Meanwhile, GM spinmeister Tom Wilkinson assured the DetN that there's gold in them thar' hills, when should GM need it. "Additional measures could include further reducing structural costs, selling noncore assets, and retiming or eliminating other capital spending. In addition, we will consider opportunistically executing financing transactions in the global capital markets, although we have nothing to announce." While we await that announcement, add "opportunistically executing" to "operationally bankrupt" and "aggressively conservative" to your lexicon of two-word bankruptcy-related expressions. 

Citroen has unveiled its new C3 Picasso, which is Citroen-code for mini-minivan version of their regular B-segment car, the Citroen C3. What is a mini-minivan version? The not-all-that-secret secret is that before Scion gave us the xB and other high-roofed five-passenger vehicles, the Europeans were all over that business. They call 'em MPVs (Multi-Passenger Vehicles, en anglais) on that side of the pond. The term can describe anything from an eight-passenger Chrysler Grand Voyager to a top hat-friendly version of a B-segment car (Fit, Yaris, MINI). The C3 Picasso fits into that last category, where it will compete with the likes of the Opel Meriva, Renault Modus, and Honda Jazz. Citroen is saying it'll install 90 and 110hp diesels, as well as gas engines good for 95 and 120hp. All will tote around what is pretty much guaranteed to be an extremely flexible interior of folding, flopping seats. Let's just hope that sinking European sales don't make this the Picasso's blue period.

Pixamo Gallery

Last night's banner headline over at the gadget blog Engadget read "2010 Prius revealed, sneakers still a major design influence." But no, it wasn't revealed and no, that's not the Prius. (Props to Engadget for being snarky, at the least.) This was a great case of how misinformation spreads like a gasoline-fueled fire in the ol blogosphere. Here's how it went down: Car and Driver put up a story with some not remarkably new details and a CGI of the next generation Prius just to illustrate. Of course, they didn't actually say it was a photoshop or "artist's rendering." TG Daily picked up the story from Car and Driver, along with the picture. Then Engadget – one of the largest gadget and tech blogs on the 'nets – ran with the story from TG Daily. Eventually a reader alerted Engadget that they were holding onto a not-so-hot photochop. The site added a disclaimer at the bottom of their post "Update: Our bad, looks like the image above is apparently just Car and Driver's illustration of what they think it COULD look like. Thanks, Dave." Dave? Dave's not here. Anyway, that's cool. But why is the headline still saying "revealed?" And for whatever it's worth, Vince Burlapp already posted the same CGI – as well as a back view – on Saturday.

Scott Held draws a line in the sand. “I firmly believe we will be selling Chrysler for quite a long time.” Held is the president and managing partner of Sherwood Partners. In the same year that Chrysler’s U.S. sales have shrunk by 35.9 percent, his group has just spent CA$18m on a new, super-sized Chrysler dealership in Edmonton, Alberta. What if Held’s wrong and Chrysler goes belly up? “I know I am taking a risk,” Held admits. "But I have faith."

I'm no good at math. If I need to crunch numbers– relative mpgs, the long term cost of interest payment deals, Rick Wagoner's salary increases– I let Frank do it for me. Otherwise TTAC's Best and Brightest "correct" my erroneous calculations in no uncertain terms. As students of our education system's failures will attest, I am not the only checkbook balancing-challenged citizen of these great United States. This knowledge is also shared by various state lottery commissions, who understand that greed, like love, is numerically illiterate. The New York Times reports that Florida has joined Georgia, New Mexico, Oklahoma and Washington in offering tickets that award "gas for life" instead of cold, hard cash. "Not that a winner’s right to free gasoline is unlimited. Rather, each winner will be awarded 26 prepaid gas cards, each worth $100, every year until death. Were the 44-year-old Mr. Acosta to win, and live to be twice his current age, the total payout to him in free gasoline would be $114,400. That is far short of the [$250k] first prize, particularly since virtually all the gas prize would be paid in future dollars." Future dollars? WTH is a future dollar? I want my payout in good old American currency! Anyway, here's the thinking: "Gas has become more precious than cash now,” Bernard Feldman told the Old Gray Lady. Even when it isn't.

OK, Sharon we'll bite. What's the deal with the Ford Escape Hybrid? Is it true that The Blue Oval Boyz purposely restrict supply because they lose money on every one they sell? And the answer is… "There are regional spots of very high demand," FoMoCo spinmeister Alan Hall told The Detroit News. "We are building to our production plans of 24,000 units per year (of Ford Escape and Mercury Mariner hybrids) combined." Sigh. So, surely that's it, yes? I mean we can't very well talk about a shortage of GM's hybrid SUVs, as customers for the two-mode gas – electric behemoths are lined-up none deep. Or can we? "GM's other hybrid trucks, the full-size Chevrolet Tahoe and GMC Yukon, are hard to find, in part because about half of the automakers' dealers opted not to sell them. Also, GM has produced the vehicles in limited numbers." Aw c'mon Sharon, the reason GM dealers don't have hybrid SUVs on their lots is that nobody wants them. By your own count, GM sold less than 1500 hybrid SUVs so far this year. Suggesting that GM dealers won't stock them because they don't want to "go through special training" is more than disingenuous. It's lying.

Well, here we are, sitting on the latest WP platform. So far, so good. Well, except for the problem with the podcast and the numerous New Content Notifications sent out for same. And yes, we know that the podcast's iTunes listing falls off the proverbial table after two days. Rest assured, as I do, that our highly capable technical staff are on the case. There's a lot of custom code within this sucker, so they've done well to get us this far. While they sort that out, if you experience any other glitches, please note them below. Hopefully, the new WP platform will solve the problems with the comment edit functions and, get this, offer some advantages. Like… a gallery! Yes, an honest-to-God photo gallery function with thumbnails and all. The new platform is also a first step towards our totally rad web 2.0 site. But, for the time being, thanks again for your patience, understanding and participation. 

GM wants to have a production version of its plug-in electric – gas hybrid Chevrolet Volt ready in time for its centennial this September. Automotive News [sub] cites "people familiar with the project" [Ed: my haven't they been busy today] who say the ailing American automaker is rushing to finish their four-wheeled Hail Mary by September 16, when RenCen celebrates the 100th anniversary of its founding by Billy Durant. In spite of the self-imposed deadline, "a GM spokesman declined to comment on the timeline for its next announcements on the Volt, which will include naming a supplier for the vehicle's lithium-ion battery pack." How can GM PR claim a "production version" of the Volt will be ready when they can't even say who'll supply the battery pack eight weeks before the debut? With ease, apparently. GM seems to be banking on the usual fawning media coverage to divert attention from the real issue: crashing sales, a raging cash conflagration and the threat of Chapter 11 just over the horizon. But hey! We'll have a hand-assembled "production" Volt to show off. What more could you want?

Huh. There can only be three explanations. One: The Wall Street Journal was seriously duped by a stock manipulator or a member of one of GM's warring factions. Two: The Wall Street Journal made shit up– there are no "these people" or "people familiar with the matter" or "people close to senior leadership." Or three: GM is lying; they are considering terminating/selling Buick, GMC, Pontiac, Saab and/or Saturn. Bloomberg ignores the implications and reports the refutation: "GM spokesman Tony Cervone… said no brands are under 'strategic review' beyond Hummer." Well, that's unequivocal. Then again, we know for a fact that GM's use of the term 'strategic review' is misleading; the automaker has shut off all HUMMER's dealer support and new product development. Anyway, the denial puts paid to my theory that GM PR planted the story to bolster the ailing automaker's sagging stock price and help it raise a little money (as in $15b). I mean, GM PR wouldn't purposely plant a story and then deny it, would they? Nah. It's probably one more example of the panic and confusion aboard the holed, listing ship that is General Motors. 

Full disclosure. I've made zero. I'm lucky enough to be in a socio-economic bracket (i.e. no mortgage, no children, write my gas off come tax time) where I haven't changed my driving habits an iota. Case in point, I enjoyed a 1,000 mile excursion up to wine country in a gas-guzzling FX50 (review pending) at pretty much 90 mph the entire time. But Sweet Pete doesn't not agree with my lifestyle choices. More on point, he's utterly dismayed at the direction our country is headed, and is using Detroit's tsores as a bellwether for all that's wrong with our country. According to Pete, plenty's wrong. Solution? He's calling for a near Manhattan Project-like national, "mustering [of] this nation's brilliant technical resources and mind power, and unifying it with our manufacturing expertise to forge a new urgency of purpose, with an unwavering focus on getting this country back in shape and on its game." Of course when people talk about big federal projects, what they aren't saying is that we all need to chip in. Only Pete is saying exactly that. Your thoughts?

Obviously, TTAC's Best and Brightest know that paralipsis means drawing attention to something soyou can prove that it's unimportant by proceeding to ignore it. I reckon it's the perfect word to describe Motown's coverage of Black Hole Black Tuesday, when The Big 2.8's SUV and pickup truck sales (not to mention cars) took a body blow, one of many to follow. But there is a wider point here: life goes on. The vast majority of people– and by "people" I'm referring to non-pistonheads– are not bothered by any of this. They remain blissfully unaware of Motown's seismic shocks. Most will have no idea that Detroit is in trouble until a bubble-headed bleached blond looks at them in the eye and says "Detroit is in trouble." Whatever explanations are offered past that point are forgotten within seconds. And then the story itself. It's only when the "news" becomes personal that it gains any sort of resonance. If a GM dealer treats a customer like shit or their car breaks down on the way to pickup the kids, it's far more noteworthy– to them– than an unrelated Detroit automaker going bankrupt. Which is exactly why one or more of the Big 2.8 is going to go bankrupt. Anyway, leaving that aside, our podcast. 

[NOTE: The podcast function is not working at the moment. The techs are aware. As soon as it's working, I'll remove this message. I apologize for the inconvenience.] 

Japan has laws mandating the size of your waistline. And now the auto companies are slimming down their cars–any way they can. Automotive News [sub] reports Nissan plans to reduce its fleet's average weight by 15 percent by 2015 (from 2005 levels). Toyota is looking for a 10 percent loss. Mazda wants to pare 220 lbs. from each of its new models. Honda's trimming down (2008 Accord notwithstanding), but hasn't publicized any goals. Automakers are doing what they can to lose weight, from using aluminum and plastic body panels to re-engineering existing components to make them lighter. For example, the next Prius' electric motor will be one-sixth as heavy as the current powerplant; the batteries will weigh half as much. Honda's even going so far as to shave off slivers of steel between spot welds on the Fit to save a few ounces overall. Adding lightness is an expensive business, but with existing safety regulations and new fuel efficiency standards, there may be no choice.

That was then, this is now. Oh wait; that's now too– at least according to our friends over at Autoblog. Scribe Dan Roth offers the testimonial upon hearing the news that Volvo's COO is spinning faster than a supersonic dradle. ""We want to continue to compete with Mercedes, BMW and Audi," Steven Armstrong, Volvo's COO tells Automotive News [sub]. "We're working to improve the premium-ness of the brand and our products." Shouldn't that be premiumnessosity? And who considers Volvo an alternative to a Merc, Bimmer or Audi? You know; other than Autoblog? Not U.S. consumers apparently. "Volvo sold 458,323 units worldwide last year, of which 106,213 were sold in the United States. Volvo's U.S. sales peaked at 139,067 units in 2004, but they are expected to fall to around 95,000 this year." While we await the Swedish brand's long-denied sale, we're left wondering about Roth's comprehension and sentence construction skills. "The possibility of building its cars in the United States might bring prices down [Ed: the possibility will bring prices down?] and allow better developed performance versions, versus the outclassed R models of the past," Roth contends. "The issue is not quite as high on the agenda as it was in January," Armstrong said. 

James Bond had a lot of magnificent rides during his extensive career. Aside from the iconic Aston Martin DB5, I consider the Vanquish to be the quintessential Bondmobile. The Vanquish was AM's flagship for seven years, until Aston "temporarily" replaced it with the '07 DBS. The S is a dramatic design, but all those holes in the hood, carbon-fiber insertions and big aprons make it look "overtuned." It's a little bit too flashy for those of us who prefer to be stirred, not shaken. (Aren't Lambos supposed to be the whip of choice for the guy that shows-up at the party with gold chains around his neck?) James Bond himself doesn't seem to be too fond of the DBS; he keeps destroying it. In 2010, we'll the Vanquish's "legitimate" successor. Meanwhile, I took the liberty of photochopping one for you. You may notice that I preserved some elements from the original car, like the prominent rear shoulders, the round fog-lights and the chrome accents that begin at the base of the A-pillars and join under the rear window. The rest was just an effort to keep it simple and elegant. Aston heritage speaks softly. And carries a big stick. 

Since its introduction in 2005, the Bugatti Veyron hasn't made a dime for corporate parent Volkswagen. The original development costs were so high that even with a million dollar price tag, the Veyron sales weren't enough to put the project into the black. According to an interview with Bugatti CEO Dr. Franz-Josef Paefgen in the Netherlands' AutoTelegraaf, Bug will turn a profit in those most magical of years, 2010. That's when they'll finally sell enough of the quad-turbo meisterwerk to pay for the program. As for another model, who needs another model? But seriously, a replacement for the Veyron will supposedly arrive in 2011 or 2012– soon enough that collectors may take the claim seriously, but far enough away that VW can change their plans completely if needs be. But since Bugatti can only sell so many Veyrons, and there are only so many Fifth Avenue designers to stamp their logo on a "version" of the car, it seems reasonable that they'd have to do something else. But what? A targa– sorry, removable panel roof? A four-door sedan? A 2000 horsepower coupe? When your modus operandi is "ridiculous," it's hard to follow that up as being "even more ridiculous." And don't forget, Volkswagen also has Bentley and Lamborghini in the wheelhouse. Decisions, decisions. I know! What about killing the brand?