Breaking news: Fiat has just signed a “non-binding term sheet” with ChryCo. The Italian automaker will acquire a 35 percent interest in Chrysler for… nothing. No cash. No assets. Niente. And yet the Chrysler – Fiat deal comes complete with the United Auto Workers’ (UAW) blessing. It’s a nice thought: a global alliance to pull Chrysler’s fat from the fire, save the taxpayer’s bacon and uncook the UAW’s golden goose. But there’s zero chance of Fiat riding to the rescue of Chrysler. It’s just another part of Chrysler’s Big Lie.

When Ford unloaded Land Rover on India’s Tata Motors, commentators didn’t see a whole lot of future for the brand. Sure, Landies are known worldwide for bearing the white man’s burden in places where he was eventually kicked-out and replaced by ruthless, genocidal despots. But the western world’s new-found fascination with automotive CO2 levels (of all things) didn’t bode well for Britain’s stilt-borne barges. Even before the transfer, Land Rover has been busy appeasing [both] 4X4-loving tree huggers by hanging-out the greenwashing– paying for carbon credits, stocking the cafeteria with organic cauliflower cheese, that sort of thing. Under its new masters, the planet-friendly spin continues. A press release this morning reveals that Landie’s Gaydon training facility has been converted to Eden Project II.

(Read More…)

It’s the last day of our redesign our non-existent logo competition, and the submissions have been anything but non-existent. TTAC’s Best and Brightest have answered the call in force, demonstrating a depth of design talent that would shame, well, me. Given the volume of submissions, I’ve created a new category: Logo Contest (no points for creativity there). If you want to see all the designs, simply click on “News,” then select “Logo Contest” from the drop-down menu. As promised, TTAC’s crack [smoking] staff will wade through all the work to find the ten or so that best encapsulate The Truth About Cars’ editorial stance and style. Then we’ll put them to a popular vote. Meanwhile, thanks to all those who invested their time, effort and passion into this contest on our behalf. (Excluding the selfish gene theory.) It’s reassuring to know that the TTAC brand resonates so well with its owners.

Yesterday, we learned that court-appointed bailiffs are knocking on the doors of UK motorists who’ve failed to pay their fines, and driving them to the cashpoint machine. Now we read that Her Majesty’s government plans to seize and crush uninsured motorists’ vehicle, even if they’re parked. “The Driver Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA) would work with insurance companies to identify uninsured cars [using mobile number plate recognition cameras], Reuters reports. “Letters will be sent to owners found without insurance, threatening them a 100 pound penalty notice, rising to as much as 1,000 pounds if they are taken to court. They would also face the seizure of their car, which would be sold, or destroyed if of low value. ‘These tough new measures will leave uninsured drivers with nowhere to hide,’ said Road Safety Minister Jim Fitzpatrick.” The Powers That Be justify the crackdown smackdown with sobering stats. “The government says uninsured and untraced drivers kill 160 people every year and injure 23,000 others. As well as the human cost, uninsured driving adds an extra 30 pounds a year to every motorist’s insurance, adding up to 400 million pounds of additional premiums.” So really, it’s all about saving lives and reducing the burden on innocent motorists. Who knew?

So, this is how it’s gonna go, eh? Chrysler’s going to dress-up the cratered car company long enough to use federal funds to stay alive long enough to strip and flip the company’s assets. Sweet. For some. More specifically, if Fiat’s grabbing 35 percent of Chrysler, can we, the taxpayers, have our $4b back now please? Nope. “The alliance does not contemplate that Fiat would make a cash investment in Chrysler or commit to funding Chrysler in the future.” Jeez. Couldn’t they at least contemplate it? Anyway, a joint statement (don’t bogart that BS, my friend) explains the thinking “The alliance, to be a key element of Chrysler’s viability plan, would provide Chrysler with access to competitive, fuel-efficient vehicle platforms, powertrain, and components to be produced at Chrysler manufacturing sites. Fiat would also provide distribution capabilities in key growth markets, as well as substantial cost savings opportunities. In addition, Fiat would provide management services supporting Chrysler’s submission of a viability plan to the U.S. Treasury as required.” That last one’s kinda weird. What “management services” are required to write a viability plan? Emptying the waste baskets?

(Read More…)

Well, he should know. I mean, when the head of the United Auto Workers (UAW) says GM can’t satisfy Congress’ conditions for a second major suckle on Uncle Sam’s teat, you gotta listen. Big Ron Gettelfinger is the guy who has to agree to an equity-for-health-care-payment swap as one of the two major conditions for the cash. “Honestly,” Ron Gettelfinger says, signaling the spinmongery to come. “Most people that have looked at this from a realistic standpoint would say this timeline is almost unattainable. I said myself that I hope this wasn’t set up to intentionally fail… People have no idea of the magnitude of what they were asking these companies to do.” Or to paraphrase John F. Kennedy, ask not what the UAW can do for GM, ask what Congress can do for the UAW. Or to not paraphrase John F. Kennedy, “We’ve done everything we said we were going to do up to this point,” Gettelfinger maintained, assuming that no one will attempt to substantiate a single union “give back.” “We have ongoing discussions with the companies — but nothing formalized in any way shape or form.” No surprise, then, that Gettelfinger said there’d been “no real progress” on a new agreement. The charade continues– until the congressional deadline of February 17. And beyond!

More artistry from the Best and Brightest. Our deadline is tomorrow night. Send jpegs to robert.farago@thetruthaboutcars.com.

Ex-Toyota and current Ford marketing maven Jim Farley tells Automotive News [AN, sub] that The Blue Oval Boyz “expect” to stabilize their U.S. market share– after a 13-year decline. And if that’s not stretching the boundaries of credibility (your call), Jimbo reckons the new Lincoln MKT and, what was it again? MKS “could” increase the luxury brand’s slice of the American pie. “We think we have a really good chance this year. We don’t know what the luxury market is going to look like, but the one thing we’re really focused on is making sure that people see our products as aspirational and they pay the price.” Although Farley fails to provide a plan to achieve this goal, AN reckons it could may maybe perhaps happen. “Lincoln could gain share even as the brand’s total sales fall below 100,000 for the first time since 1982. Lincoln finished 2008 with sales of 107,295, its lowest total since 1983. With forecasts for lower industry sales in 2009, executives acknowledged that new-vehicle entries may not be enough to keep Lincoln sales in six figures.”

Automotive News [sub] reports that GM’s Zen Master/Product Guru Mark LaNeve is turning his back on ye olde (2006) “market pricing.” You know, where the sticker price reflects the actual selling price. Or thereabouts. “In terms of a pure strategy where we price right to market and have no incentive spending — we have very few vehicles where we’d do that. We’ll have some level of incentive spending almost across the board.” After that… I’m confused. Why has GM increased ’09 product prices by 2.7 percent (roughly $790)? And what’s this mean? “LaNeve said GM prefers to spend incentive money for competitive reasons — not to reduce inventory, as it has been doing, because the latter is ‘wasted money.’ “We continue to want to price our vehicles to the market. We’d like to see incentive spending wane once we get our inventories adjusted. I think it smoothes out after the first quarter. We’re hardly building anything in the first quarter.” So, Uncle Sugar’s paying GM not to build cars, so they can eventually offer incentives to steal market share from carmakers who aren’t being paid not to build cars? Sweet.

The [UK’s] Blackburn Citizen reports that Blackpool magistrates sent a bailiff to Andy Miller’s house to collect an overdue £60 speeding fine. Actually, £350, what with court costs and all. “Father-of-five Mr Miller was driven to Accrington town centre. The bailiff parked up and waited for Mr Miller, but he collapsed in Union Street before he reached a cashpoint.” The 78-year-old died of a heart attack. Although the coroner ruled out an inquest, Miller’s family feels the court contributed to his death. “His son Mick said he wanted answers from court bosses as their letter [to the court explaining why he hadn’t paid the fine] told them his father was suffering from memory loss and confusion. Mick, who lives in Lower Darwen, said: ‘Bailiffs should not be allowed to behave like this. Dad was put under incredible duress. I know how nervous he had been and what a strain this would have been on him.”

My five-year-old looked into the bag and spied the chocolate-covered strawberry. “Just one?” she asked with equal parts indignation and incredulity. “That cost me six bucks,” I responded defensively. “I wish they were cheap,” Lola said as the treat succumbed to dental destruction. “Then we could have lots.” And there you have it: proof that price conquers all. If Godiva wants to sell me a dozen chocolate strawberries, all they have to do is lower the price. Dramatically. Of course, they can’t do that. Ingredients, labor, transportation, administration, marketing, rent, fancy bags– it all adds up. By the same token, there’s only one way automakers seeking to sell vehicles cars in today’s market can stimulate sales: slash their prices by 50 percent or so. Of course, they can’t do that. Or can they?

The E85 BOTDs are less frequent these days. Thanks to low gas prices, the ethanol industry has run headlong into what they call the “blend wall.” In fact, the corn juice supply so far outpaces demand that government subsidies, mandates and [the E85 folk hope] bailout bucks are all that stands between the industry and total collapse. In other words, here’s another auto-related enterprise whose survival depends on the taxpayers, rather than commercial success. So when I encountered E85 consumption figures for Iowa on MidwestAgnet.com, I nearly fell out of my chair. Well, OK, I’m too old for that action, but the numbers indicated a huge jump. [jump after the jump] And the answer is… “Quarters prior to 4th quarter 2007 did not include government gallons. Beginning with the 4th quarter 2007, government gallons are included.” I’m not entirely sure what government gallons are, but whatever they are, you can bet your bippy the tank-fillers had little say in the matter. There’s some interesting info if you follow the links to Iowa’s fuel tax revenue. Year-to-date to November 2008, the state collected $198,280,544. Of that, E85 accounted for $44,683. The year previous: $35,705. And this, folks, is The Tall Corn State. 

(Read More…)