The largest provider of red light camera and speed camera services in the US admitted yesterday that public opposition has begun to affect the bottom line. In an announcement to the Australian Securities Exchange (ASX), Melbourne-based Redflex Traffic Systems reported a nine percent drop in net profit for the year ended June 30, 2009. This has come about in part as motorists increasingly refuse to pay automated fines and use public pressure to force cities to eliminate photo enforcement programs. “We have been adversely affected by reduced collection rates on some of our US contracts, write-downs on several contracts that have not been renewed, extended start-up difficulties with a major state-wide speed contract in Arizona and costs in dealing with litigation and legislative issues,” a Redflex statement explained. “These and other factors have affected profitability for the year.”
My wife and I are in the market for a slightly used car. I would like to ask the Best and Brightest: what cars should we take a look at in the under $15,000 (out the door) almost new category? Is there anything decent in this range? We want a sedan/wagon/hatch still under factory bumper-to-bumper warranty, long-term reliable, and fun to drive. Wife can’t drive a stick, and ABS is mandatory. Must get 30 Highway MPG to guarantee our low loan rate. Can it be done?
Our UK readers my be interested to learn that the Obama administration has introduced a rival to Postman Pat: Preliminary Pat. “The White House Council of Economic Advisers gave the [Cash for Clunkers] program a preliminary pat on the back Monday,” The Detroit News reports. “Saying it created or saved 21,000 jobs in its short, four-week life by forcing automakers to boost production and add shifts.” That, however, is not our money shot. A little wood, please, as the Council addresses the question of whether or not C4C simply bribed buyers to buy earlier than they would have. Stimulating new car sales but not actually increasing them. The Council admitted the possibility, but wasn’t fussed. “This time-shifting is valuable if the economy is in recession because the economy is likely to be closer to full employment in the future.” All the birds are singing, and the day is just beginning. Pat feels he’s a really happy man.
There’s some surprising news in Automotive News [sub] today in GM’s ongoing attempt to save Opel (and, more importantly, its intellectual property). Since the German Government shot down the only proposal that would keep Opel IP with GM, the General is scrambling to prevent its erstwhile German arm from falling to Magna and GAZ/Sberbank. But who on earth would give GM the $4 billion it needs (now) to keep Opel on board the mothership (for the moment)? Surely only the American taxpayers are that gullible! Unfortunately for GM, there’s a catch. Automotive News explains:
Because GM is barred from using funding from the U.S. government from its reorganization in bankruptcy to support its international operations, one of the options could include raising money by selling or mortgaging the automaker’s assets in China, one of the sources said.
VW has dreams of moving 150,000 Porsches per year by 2012. Meanwhile, Stuttgart’s finest is struggling with a nightmare market. Porsche spokesman Tony Fouladapour told TTAC that the automaker’s franchised dealers are now holding more than a 100 days’ worth of 911s, Caymans and Boxsters. (That’s up from the 92-day supply reported by Automotive News for August 1.) Not to mention the 100 to 150 box-fresh units already heading stateside. Responding to the glut, Porsche’s pulled 2010 inventories from all their dealers’ websites; some 273 Porkers have disappeared into the ether. Or is that from the ether? Either way, Porsche’s hit delete on all but a few ’10 special editions (e.g., the GT3 and Cayenne S Transsyberia). When will the 2010s return to cyberspace (or any other marketing venue)? “When the inventory situation improves.” To that end, the brand’s launched “The Porsche Moment”: 1.9 percent financing. [Thanks to The Comedian for the heads-up.]
The Freep reports that Ford officials are meeting with the United Auto Workers Union today, to renegotiate elements of their labor contract. Reducing pay for entry-level workers and reducing skilled-trades job classifications are said to be at the top of Ford’s to-do list. And why not? GM got the UAW to agree to streamlined skilled-trade positions, an entry-level wage freeze, a performance bonus freeze and a no-strike agreement. Why wouldn’t the UAW do the same for Ford, just because the Blue Oval didn’t give up major ownership stakes to the union and its allies in government?
Despite indications that Chrysler was moving towards a contract manufacturing business model, Automotive News [sub] reports that ChryCo’s Italian masters are considering not building Nissan’s next-generation Titan pickup on the Dodge Ram platform. And this surprising news has Nissan scrambling to look for other options. “My team is spending a lot of time looking at different scenarios of what we can do,” says the father of the Titan, Nissan VP for Product Planning Larry Dominique. One of the options is a mild in-house refresh and continued production. Another is approaching other automakers for a quick fix. Analysts tell AN that Ford, GM and Toyota are unlikely to help out, although Toyota’s excess Tundra capacity indicates that it might be a leading candidate for a Nissan rebadge. The only problem? “I doubt sharing a full-sized pickup with Nissan is in their corporate DNA,” says Michael Robinet of CSM Worldwide. “Nissan is in a precarious position, as their options are few.” Should Nissan abandon full-size pickups, or is there an option that actually makes sense?
I was driving down the freeway in the left lane just the other day when a quick peek in the rearview mirror told me that another car was approaching me from behind. It was still a ways off, and its silver-gray color barely stood out from the unseasonably gray skies. As it drew nearer at a fairly rapid clip, I had to look again, and after a quick glance my initial identification was “2004 Chevrolet Monte Carlo.” It wasn’t until the car was within the two-second following envelope that I realized it was actually a Jaguar XF. Being the considerate driver I am, I pulled over and allowed the Jag to float past on a wave of blandonymity. But not every driver is as ethical with the lane etiquette as me, which is why the Germans came up with the term “Überholprestige.” Roughly translated it means, “the ability of a car to intimidate drivers into moving out of your way,” and the Jaguar XF rates about a 2 on the scale [ED. Out of what?]. In contrast, the Audi Q7 chases you down looking like the love child of a sperm whale and a bullet train. Seriously, the Q’s grill alone looks like most cars could pass comfortably through it and be pulled into the Q’s belly never to be heard from again. So which cars do you think demand respect? Which models part traffic before you like the Red Sea and which leave you stuck behind disrespectful peasants?
A recent study shows that the generation gap has dramatically narrowed. Parents and kids are now each others’ best friends, or something like that. But it wasn’t always so chummy, especially in the sixties and early seventies. I have a theory for that: it was the heyday of the rear-facing third-seat station wagon. Nothing like the generations traveling while facing in opposite directions to cultivate oppositional disorder. And just to add a little more dissonance, how about we examine the two most polar opposite examples of the genre.
The Detroit News reports that GM is removing its “Mark of Excellence” badges from its entire lineup, starting with the new Chevy Equinox. “We are just really focused on the four core brands and this provided us with another opportunity to make sure they were at the forefront,” say GM spokefolks. “Plus people on Twitter were making fun of them.” Okay, so the last part is made up. Still, about time, no? As industry commentators never tire of mentioning, consumers don’t buy GM as a brand, they buy Chevys, Buicks, Cadillacs and GMCs. Okay, they buy Chevys. Anyway, what’s the point of having four separate versions of every platform if there’s a badge reminding everyone that they’re all basically the same? Don’t answer that, it’s a rhetorical question. Instead, hit the jump to learn how to de-Mark of Excellence your ride.
The Detroit Free Press reports there’s “a $10-billion provision tucked deep inside thousands of pages of health care overhaul bills that could help the UAW’s retiree health-care plan and other union-backed plans. It would see the government — at least temporarily — pay 80 cents on the dollar to corporate and union insurance plans for claims between $15,000 and $90,000 for retirees age 55 to 64.” So the union giveth: accepting stock in GM and Chrysler in place of future, theoretical contributions to their health care VEBA (in addition to $3 billion cash payments). And the union taketh: scarfing $10 billion in federal health care payments. Did the UAW know this was coming down the pike? As the hunter in Jurassic Park said just before the raptors tore him to pieces, “clever girl.” The autoblogosphere is alight with accusations of “union payoff.” And for good reason . . .
Just kidding. No zombie watch for the Cash for Clunkers (a.k.a. C.A.R.S.) program, even though it’s already burned through one life and two dealer deadlines. Automotive News [AN, sub] reports that Uncle Sam’s extended the dealer deadline again, thanks to ongoing computer problems. Transportation spokeswoman Jill Zuckman “didn’t specify a particular time for the deadline, and said it depended on how long it would take the government to get the clunkers Web site up so that dealers could file claims.” While the boffins sort that out, more “issues” are arising. As of early Monday morning, dealers submitted 635,186 claims worth $2.65 billion in rebates. Although AN says the number puts the payout “close” to the $3 billion limit, C.A.R.S. may already be over budget. Add up the administrative costs and the rebate requests “stuck” in the system, and the question arises: what happens to those deals that may arrive once in a lifetime, after the money’s gone? Meanwhile, a group of dealers is keeping its “shadow” Cash for Clunkers plan going . . .
In a desperate attempt to save lucrative photo enforcement programs in the face of widespread scandal, the Italy’s Ministry of Interior on Friday announced significant reforms to the way speed cameras and red light cameras are operated in the country. The move followed explosive allegations of corruption involving over one hundred public officials and a number of executives from the photo enforcement industry. The investigation is ongoing with police forces having conducted raids and arrests earlier this month, in June and in January. Interior Minister Roberto Maroni set out the new regulations in a directive issued to local authorities. “The primary objective is… to plan (speed) control activities so that they represent a real tool of prevention and not merely a means to raise cash,” Maroni said in a statement. “Speed control is a police service that cannot be delegated to companies that rent equipment.”
Recent Comments