GM’s luxury brand just can’t buy a break. Maybe I should rephrase that… [hat tip to Nick for the link]

The tipster writes:

Press and Landry spent three days going to their six business areas for dealer conferences. They said, “If all you dealers do not order your Feb and March allocation, Chrysler will liquidate.” How’s that for a pep talk sales pitch? Not only that, but they also said there’s a 50/50 chance they will liquidate even if we do order. So, according to Press and Landry, the only chance we have to save our dealership is to overload our stock. An Iowa dealer asked, “What if we can’t afford 40 new units because our bank won’t floor them?” Press answered, “Then we’ll liquidate.” So they are selling fear to their dealers. Go buy our shit NOW or you won’t have a dealership. The Fiat deal was just to be able to export Dodge trucks to Europe, that’s the nuts and bolts on that “merger of equals.” Chrysler’s suits also described the talks with GM: “We went on a date with Nissan, had sex, and they got some trucks we got some cars. Then it was 2AM, we were drunk and started talking romantically with our cousins at GM, we realized that our children would have crooked teeth.” God I love this business.

GM may be avoiding death with Uncle Sugar’s $13.4b (and counting) bridge loans to nowhere. But it’s not doing so well on the tax front. The Detroit News reports that GM’s been “quietly” lobbying Uncle Sam to drop a $7b tax bill. Without success. OK, folks, hang onto your green shades. “The tax liability stems from GM’s plan to reduce its $62 billion debt to $30 billion by offering bondholders equity in exchange for existing debt. GM also wants to use stock rather than cash to fund half of its contributions to a retiree health care fund to be managed by the UAW. But the debt swapped for equity could be considered income for tax purposes and GM’s ability to offset that income with prior-year losses, a common accounting practice, is sharply limited under a complex provision of the 1986 tax code that applies when a company changes ownership. The code was written to limit the ability of companies to buy other money-losing companies just to avoid paying taxes. GM plans to issue new stock to bondholders and the UAW and has already issued the government warrants, which may trigger a ‘technical ownership change,’ GM said in its memo.” And thus, a $7b tax bill. Now, let’s define chutzpah.

(Read More…)

and could only write tickets for ONE infraction, what it would it be? For me, it’s failure to stop at a stop sign. I live in a neighborhood that looks a bit like the one in Lady in the Tramp. We’ve got wide sidewalks, Victorian houses, well-groomed canines, equally well-groomed Swamp Yankees, a property tax bill that could crush rocks, the works. As the proud owner of four daughters and two dogs, I’m keenly aware that the sidewalks are often used for recreation: walking, running, bicycling, skateboarding, etc. (And that’s just the dogs.) So when I see a motorist blow through a four-way stop sign at speed, usually clutching a cell phone, I wish the capitol city would re-instate capital punishment. For some reason, I’m even more narked by R.I. motorists’ near-universal propensity to perform a so-called “rolling stop” at octagon-marked intersections. What part of STOP are you having trouble with? The real danger here: countless drivers perform this maneuver whilst turning at an intersection. They don’t bother checking to see if anyone’s crossing. The resulting carnage isn’t pretty. [see: above]. And I’ve seen cops watch drivers execute this illegal maneuver right in front of them, without batting a single chowderhead. So, what’s in your fictional ticket pad?

I’m delighted to welcome TTAC commentator factotum to the other side of the WordPress platform. When Jeff volunteered to perform endless search-and-amend missions on our typos, bad grammar, factual mistakes, variance from the Chicago stylebook, punctuation transgressions, etc., I leaped at his offer. He stepped to one side. I hit the floor. Nothing new there. I freely admit that I get sloppier at the keys as I get tired, and man do I get tired knocking out this stuff. To that end I’m off the Lexapro. And man do I get dizzy. With Jeff sweeping up behind the circus elephants—what? and give up show biz?—I’m hoping my OCD won’t return with such a vengeance, so I can restore the personal energy levels that helped propel this quirky little car site to its million man per month march. OK, so now that I’ve done the TMI bit, I surrender the recently cleaned floor to Mr. Puthuff to introduce himself.

(Read More…)

Now that President Barack Obama has decided to let California raise America’s fleet-wide fuel economy regs to something like a 42mpg average, the automakers are howling with righteous idignation. Not. How could they? Not only would that be impolite to the incoming adminstration, environmentalists, the Democratic party and mother Earth, but GM and Chrysler are now more-or-less owned by the same federal government that just told CA to go for it. The New York Times dusted off ye olde “greedy American automakers are dragging their heels over higher mpg vehicles” template, but really, their heart just isn’t in it. But you’ve gotta give the Gray Lady credit for digging up a least one hysterical Neanderthal. Yes, it’s our old pal David E. Cole, whose Center for Automotive Research (CAR, geddit?) created the widely-quoted and entirely specious study that justified the Motown bailout buffet in the first place (if they go down, 42b workers will hit the soup lines). You can guess what David said, but it’s still fun to read. And wait ’til you don’t hear what Detroit doesn’t say…

(Read More…)

Thanks to strangely prescient asset mortgaging, Ford has not yet joined Bailout Nation. Providing, of course, you discount its forthcoming share of the Department of Energy’s $25b no- to low-cost “retooling” loans (remember them?). But don’t get to thinking that FoMoCo doesn’t have its eye on the prize (federal succor). The Detroit News reports this morning that Ford’s lobbyists are hard at work in the teat suckling department. “Ford Motor Co. is calling on Washington to do more to stimulate the economy and get consumers back into its showrooms, after posting a record loss of nearly $14.6 billion for 2008 on Thursday.” Ready? “Anything that can incentivize the consumer, especially with regard to automobiles, would be great, because it’s such an important part of the economy,” CEO Alan Mulally told The Detroit News. “I know that they know how important the automotive sector is.” Cue “I’d do anything” from Oliver, substituting the word “money” for “love.” Anything? But what, exactly?

(Read More…)

Inflammatory much? Of course we do. Quick digression: Bain & Co is one of those international consultancies whose website doesn’t provide a client list, or any exact idea of what it does for them. Reading between the lines, like McKinsey & Company, they probably specialize in firing people (e.g., “Where appropriate, we work with clients to make it [increasing “value”] happen—which may mean fundamentally changing the company.”) The connection between Bain and a study of potential EV ownership is left unspoken. Looks like the usual client angling to me. OK, so, Business Week reports that Bain reports that EV intenders are rich bastards. “The survey of 4,000 people in eight countries, including the U.S., China, Japan and Germany, finds that high-income buyers are ready to buy all-electric vehicles as a second vehicle for short trips. ‘Consumers would be buying now if there were products,’ says Gregor Matthies, a Munich-based partner at Bain who specializes in the auto industry.” Did they only survey high income buyers? Not specified. So which theoretical EVs are we talking about?

(Read More…)

What’s the opposite of reductio ad absurdum? Whatever it is, that’s what we’re looking at, as Bailout Nation (hat tip to Daniel Howes) continues to expand. The Wall Street Journal reports that the rental car giants are putting in their bid to dine at the multi-billion dollar bailout buffet. “Avis Budget Group Inc., Hertz Global Holdings Inc. and other rental-car companies are lobbying Congress to allow them to use Troubled Asset Relief Program funds to finance new auto purchases. The House of Representatives included a clause in a TARP reform bill that it passed last week to give the government authority to back loans to rental-car companies and other fleet purchasers. The bill has now moved on to the Senate.” So rental car companies AND fleet purchasers get low-interest federal loans (a.k.a. free money)? Hey, I own two cars! Is that a fleet? Trust me: they’re deeply troubled assets. Where’s my bailout? I know! Let’s ask Barney Frank!

(Read More…)

(Read More…)

Once we learn the identity of the investors behind Cerberus’ Chrysler FIATsco, the “debate” will move on as if nothing happened. Even if Osama Bin Laden steps forward as the automaker’s real owner, the furore will only last long enough to confiscate his shares while the Congress restocks the multi-billion dollar bailout buffet. Remember: back when the bailout bridge to nowhere loans were going down, Senator Corker pronounced ChryCo DOA. History. Toast. Unsustainable. A blot on the landscape. A zombie. Nobody even blinked. Here’s your $3b. See you in a month. OK, ar the precise moment of Corker’s Chrysler Crucifixion, CEO Bob Nardelli’s eyelids went into Morse Code mode (translation: I paid for this abuse?). And then everyone pretended that no one had farted. Hang on; that’s not the most self-flattering of metaphors. OK, let me put it this way: the day that we learn the real story behind Cerberus’ investment is the not the day the company will face the music. Meanwhile, someone should tell the American public that Chyrsler’s CEO owns one of these.