Automotive News [AN, sub] continues the Black Tuesday mop-up; this time they pickup on pickup profits. Or lack thereof. "The segment is expected to shrink by about 500,000 units this year to as low as 1.65 million. That's a far cry from the 2.5 million in the peak years of 2004 and 2005." Buried at the end of an article suggesting that now might not be the best time to be launching a new Ford F150 or Dodge Ram (if not now, when), AN reveal that F150 annual sales are tumbling from last year's 690,589 to, by Ford's admission, "well below 600,000 this year." Rounding that out to a 100k hit, at $8k – $10k profit per vehicle, that's $800m to $1b the cratering market's excising from FoMoCo's annual pretax profits. (That's profit folks, not turnover.) Using those same numbers, Ford's "horrendous" 142-day supply (226k) of F150s equates to $1.808,000 to 2.26b to worth of profit locked-up on the lots. AN doesn't run the numbers for GM and can't do the math for Chrysler (it's now mostly owned by private equity). Instead, they offer this helpful tidbit. "Chrysler remains hopeful for a turnaround. 'Whenever gasoline prices spike, there's a free fall in the truck segment,' said Mike Accavitti, director of the Dodge brand. 'But the market is still sizable.' 

GM's executive director of manufacturing quality Joe Mazzeo speaks the truth when he tells The Detroit News that GM's customers are oblivious to the threat to vehicle quality posed by GM's employee changeover. But they might care later, after GM replaces some 19k "top tier" union workers with half-price subs, expecting them to hit the assembly line after two week's training. "GM has been flooded with job seekers at many plants, but first crack at the jobs goes to idled employees of GM and Delphi Corp., the automaker's bankrupt former parts unit. The jobs then open up to outsiders, whose only shot at landing one is to be referred by someone who works at a factory." How reassuring. On the other hand, "GM is going to exhaustive lengths to ensure the shift doesn't erase hard-won improvements in factory efficiency and vehicle quality… [Workers] will be reminded that well-made vehicles keep consumers buying, which in turn leads to job security — and vice versa. Many workers will get a job shadowing assignment, and all of them will learn through simulated training done on assembly lines with fake cars made of two-by-fours and plywood." As for how many of those 19k union jobs are being axed and how many simply "downsized," the DetN is clear: "The automaker won't say." Oh, and those workers who are "transitioning" from one tier to the other get ten day's training– the same amount of education Disney requires for its "cast members." 

I know that's waaaay too easy a headline, but how else would you describe this ad for the Ford Flex, launched this weekend? The TV spot gives the crossover a SteadyCamaroscopy and a 360-degree website spin (or eight) to the tune of the song "Son gonna rise" by Citizen Cope. So the unique selling point is… style. I mean it must be, as there's no strapline revealing its Unique Selling Point, no voiceover announcing its arrival, no nothin'. Ah, but there's another ad [click here]. This one touts the Flex as an "agile, 24mpg crossover," then proclaims– both in narrative and in mescaline-tinged imagery– its drug-like ability to warp-your mind. "Suddenly, everything looks a little different." In fact, "Discover Flex" is as trippy a tagline as I've heard in some time. Like, wow Scoob. 

The post-Black Tuesday world is an interesting place for media junkies looking to gauge the U.S. automotive press' level of sycophancy. Yesterday, we reported on Motor Trend's take on May's sales collapse: blame the victim (the American consumer). Or CAFE regs (the feds). Today, we present Warren Brown's analysis. And the first thing the Washington Post car columnist wants you to know: greens can't take credit for the death of the great American gas guzzler. "It is the world Hummer-haters said they wanted. It is the one for which legions of environmentalists and believers in the corrective powers of regulation lobbied. But here's suggesting that they had little to do with the current situation. When it comes to change in a capital-intensive industry such as the car business, money talks, and politics walks." High gas prices did the deed? OK, we'll buy that for a dollar (or four). But we're a little less convinced by Warren's corollary: chill. Brown says the domestics are switching gears to make money in the brave new world of $4+ gas. All will be well. "They [the transplants] have, therefore, a temporary advantage over GM, Ford and Chrysler in the current market shift from trucks to cars. But 'temporary' means just that. Domestic car companies are adjusting to fuel-price-induced changes much more quickly than vehicle sales numbers or media reports indicate." In fact, "The GM-Hummer relationship was never meant to be permanent." 

Even as Detroit races to turn-off the production spigot, dealer inventories are building to abandoned airfield levels. You want to talk trucks? In an industry where a 60-day inventory is ideal, every single GM truck has over a 100-day supply; some many more. While all three automakers swore they'd sworn off incentives (and blamed the move for reduced sales), that was then, this is now. Chrysler's Jim Press signals the fire sales to come. "It is inevitable from our standpoint because we have pricing pressure in terms of cost from steel and plastic," Press said during an interview with Dow Jones Newswires. "Incentives will be a key part but the focus will shift on those products that are facing the headwinds, such as trucks and SUVs, rather than those benefiting from the tailwind like cars." Chrysler? Cars? Tailwind? What tailwind? Anyway, the bottom line: "Chrysler's average incentive per vehicle sold in the U.S. in May was $3,714, the highest figure among the six top-selling auto makers for the month, according to Edmunds.com. Ford's average incentive totaled $3,326 followed by GM at $3,477. Nissan Motor Co.'s (NSANY) average U.S. incentive in May was $2,090, while Honda Motor Co. (HMC) was at $1,256 and Toyota was $1,045."

Motor Trend's Angus MacKenzie is pissed-off at the autoblogosphere for crapping on his advertisers' inability to predict the death of the great American gas guzzler. "Don't you love Monday morning quarterbacks? The blogosphere is in seven shades of schadenfreude this week as a shocked Detroit wipes away the blood in the aftermath of May's brutal sales slump: Why didn't Motown see this coming? We told them relying on big trucks and SUVs was a dumb idea. It was obvious gas prices were going to rise. Fire the idiots! Oh yeah? If you're reading this, I'll bet my 401k that like Rick Wagoner and company, four years ago you didn't figure you'd be paying over four bucks for a gallon of gas today. Because if you had, you would now be richer than Croesus, and lying on a tropical island somewhere, kicking back with a mojito or three, without a care in the world. Hey, we're all still writing blogs. We didn't see it coming this fast, either." Ah, this fast. And there's your Detroit excuse of the day, as laid out by GM CEO Rick Wagoner in this startling video. Oh, and this is all your fault. "Automakers grudgingly built the more fuel efficient cars the government ordered them to, but we bought gas-guzzling pickups and SUVs by the millions instead because, hey, gas was cheaper than water. Who needed to drive a girly gas-miser? So maybe we ought to ease up a little on the finger-pointing at Motown; the truth is we're all a little bit complicit here." Speak for yourself Angus. Oh wait…

TTAC is wounded. Site stability is an "issue," our page counter is still busted, I'm not sure what's going on with the RSS feed, TrueDelta links are MIA, the new site is still in development Hell and the Powers that Be be silent. But I know how to count my blessings. Family healthy, thank God. And I'm privileged to work with some of the most passionate, informed and entertaining writers and thinkers in the history of automotive journalism. First and foremost, Frank. Our Managing Editor is intelligent, indefatigable, perspicacious. I have no idea how I could run this website without Frank on the other end of the IM, setting 'em up so I can knock 'em down. Dealing with shit I can't stand so I can deal with the shit I can. Then there are TTAC's bloggers, editorialist and reviewers. Their dedication to our mission never, ever fails to reinvigorate my spirit. And Sam, my beautiful wife, who inspires and amuses me– and makes sure the writers get paid. And last but not least, I'm thankful for you, our Best and Brightest. You keep us honest and make us whole. There is no question in my mind that– together– we're bearing witness to an automotive sea change. These are horrible, fascinating times. I wouldn't want to share them with anyone else. 

What is it with Friday? Every time I think I've crossed the finish line, the bad news arrives like an uninvited guest. Of course, it's not all about me. It's about an entire industry facing cataclysmic change. Bloomberg reports: "Oil rose $11.33 to an all-time high $139.12 a barrel during trading. Crude oil surged more than $10 a barrel to a record as the dollar weakened after the U.S. unemployment rate grew the most in two decades and Morgan Stanley said prices may reach $150 within a month." As far as GM's concerned, causation don't 't make no never mind. The bottom line: the automaker's stock price ended the day at $16.22, a 33-year low. Automotive News [sub] attempts to put a brave face on it, spinning the loss as part of the larger stock market drop. No matter how you parse it, GM's still a high-cost, cash-burning, truck-heavy manufacturer leaking red ink from every pore of its North American ops, with no escape plan (although its CEO and top brass are well-protected). As this blog from the Wall Street Journal indicates, the Street is waking up to GM's death spiral, and it ain't that pretty at all. "By contrast, GM — which seemed to have covered itself well by selling assets before the buyout markets skidded to a halt last year — could end up with less than $1 billion by 2010, thanks to a combination of cash-draining losses and debt repayments, according to Lehman Brothers Holdings. Even if it tapped bank credit lines, it would by then have less on hand than the $10 billion or so analysts reckon it needs to support its everyday business."

Yes, we pat ourselves on the back. Why wouldn't we? As branding guru Al Reis once advised me "Tell 'em who you are, tell 'em that you told 'em and tell 'em again." Or something like that. Anyway, back in April, we reported that Porsche was finally putting DSG into their venerable 911, plus the usual we-need-something-for- existing-owners-to-lust-after power bump. Classic Driver confirms that the refreshed Carerra wil be blessed with a seven-speed double-clutch gearbox. Porsche calls their system Porsche-Doppelkupplung or PDK, which they invented, dammit! ("Porsche points out that its engineers developed the principle for motorsport some 25 years ago.") The updated car also also gets direct injection, debuted (to not much effect) on the Cayenne GTS. "The 3.6-litre Carrera models are up 20bhp to 345bhp, while the 3.8-litre Carrera S has jumped 30bhp, and now develops an impressive 385bhp." AND they're cleaner, more economical and .2 seconds faster from zero to 62mph. One thing we didn't foresee: new LED lights fore and aft. Now, when this PDK thing hits the Boxster S, we'll see just how fast I can drive backwards– if you know what I mean.  ;

San Francisco columnist Mark Morford has a round-up of doom and gloom on the energy front. After six paragraphs spent telling us that gas prices are high, staying high and might go higher– with enough links to build a good size fence– Morford finally gets down to the business of entertainment. Here's what the high energy future looks like to a man whose official bio proclaims that he writes about "politics, pop culture, sex, music, design, a wry and punch-drunk universe, vibrators, scotch, media, spirituality and small European cars. And sometimes, genital grooming." Got it? Right… "Carpooling will soar. People will walk, bike, scooter, take the bus, work shorter weeks, stroll and amble and hum a merry tune, reacquaint themselves with the neighborhood, telecommute, vacation locally, have more phone sex. They will shop locally to avoid skyrocketing shipping prices, buy less plastic, recycle. The era of cheap oil that enabled hideous urban sprawl will now quite possibly flip over and begin to enable the exact reverse … whatever that is." That's about it for the good bits. The rest is your boilerplate Big Oil Bush-bashing fear-mongering tripe. Still, was it as good for you as it was for me?

Writing in his FastLane blog, GM Car Czar Bob Lutz revealed that he's taken Chevy's prototype electric – gas plug-in hybrid for a spin. "I drove an official 'engineering development vehicle' with the 16-kwh lithium-ion battery pack we’ve been testing for our E-Flex System and I have to say – pun half-intended – it was electrifying." Half-intended? Which half? But seriously Bob, how was it? "While the car is still most definitely a work in progress, the thrill of driving electrically — that instant, silent torque — is certainly present and accounted for! Of course, as you can imagine, I miss the throaty roar of an engine. Once we get this whole battery thing perfected, our friends at XM Satellite Radio may have to start an Internal Combustion Channel." No seriously, Bob, where are we with this Volt thing? "Don’t run to the Chevy dealer and order your Volt yet." C'mon Bob, really. "Eventually, if and when we settle on the right battery, our E-Flex System engineers will have a lot of integrating, tuning and tweaking to do before the Volt is ready for prime time." If? Oh, by the way, while MB decided to literally sign-off on the Malibu Volt mule (how great does that sound?), it should be pointed out (as the cheerleaders at gm-volt.com do) that Maximum Bob drove the prototype all of eight miles. Woo-hoo! [thanks to KixStart for the links]

When Fred Bredermeyer was 18, Chicago's Nikko Hotel gave him a job as a parking attendant. Little did the Indiana native know that he was about to embark on a career that would earn him the ultimate accolade from The International Parking Institute. Not only did Fred get the nod, but his department– the Miami Parking Authority (MPA) won "2008 Parking Organization of the Year." Obviously, I had to call Fred to congratulate him on his victory and find out what it takes to stand at the pinnacle of parking profession. There's lot of blockbuster info in the podcast, but here's a couple of off-the-air tidbits. Fred doesn't know if the Sunshine State's license test includes parallel parking and "Miami doesn't have a parking problem. It has a walking problem." Oh, and I forgot to tell Fred that "put my money in your meter baby, so it won't run down" is one of my favorite lyrics of all time. So now he knows.

Or, more charitably (if equally egomaniacally), great minds think alike. Or, even less charitably (to both the Freep and TTAC), duh. First, let me get this off my chest. We've done the GM Attention Deficiency Disorder thing here, here, recently here and just about everywhere since ever I started this website. The fact that the Freep's Tom Walsh has only just reached this conclusion- after trying to reconcile J.D. Power's IQS rankings with domestic auto sales– is mind-boggling. As is the format of his treatise: "conversation with self." As are the simple-minded counter-arguments forwarded by his Detroit-loving half. "This [J.D.'s survey results] means that Detroit’s Big Two – General Motors and Ford Motor – are back in the game again. Right up there in quality with Toyota, Honda, Nissan, Hyundai, Audi and all those other foreign brands.” “Who cares?” “Whaddya mean, who cares? I care. We’ve got lots of trouble here in River City with plants closing, suppliers bankrupt, lots of people losing jobs. Better quality means our hometown companies will stop shrinking and start growing again.” Like Walsh's column, this realization is too little, too late. And too optimistic, too soon. 

But my God, does Roger Cohen take his time getting to the point. Before the New York Times op ed writer argues for your elected representatives to allow cheap[er] Brazilian ethanol into the U.S., Cohen attempts to entertain us with a discussion of national "re-branding." He begins with the most elliptical lead I've ever read. "Perhaps there’s something to treadmill wisdom. We’re all so narrow-band these days, using the vast resources of broadband to direct ourselves into a chosen news and ideological tunnel. Polarized pluralism defines us." Translation: Cohen was running on a treadmill (geddit?), watching an unknown news channel (broadband) when he fell into a reverie about his Brazilian exile, when the country's economy was almost as hyper-inflated as his prose. And then he thought, wow! "Energy is the country’s new brand." I'm thinking Brazil needs something a bit sexier, but the point– yes! the point!– is corn ethanol bad; sugar cane ethanol, good. "Sugar cane is not a staple. It’s eight times more productive than corn. It grows year round. It must be processed fast, so CO2-spewing transport to distant ethanol plants is impossible (unlike for corn)." The environmental impact of shipping Brazilian ethanol, pathetic workers' wages and the deforestation be damned. See? That wasn't so hard, was it?

NAFTA eh? Turns out that America's trade policy with its southern neighbor didn't quite work out as planned. ""The pressure has not been to raise the Mexican wages up, it's been to push the U.S. wages down," Ben Davis, the director of the AFL-CIO Solidarity office in Mexico City tells The Detroit News. True dat. "Mexican auto unions are taking a cue from U.S. labor leaders by offering two-tier hiring systems and salary cuts that bring already low wages down to near-Chinese levels." Taking a cue? Or, dare I say it, taking pay-offs? "Wage concessions were apparently key to convincing Ford Motor Co. to direct many of the 4,500 new jobs involved in building Fiestas to the Ford plant in Cuautitlan. Union leaders at the plant told the Associated Press they had agreed to cut wages for new hires to about half of the current wage of $4.50 per hour." $2.25 an hour? Yes. Under NAFTA, Mexico is only obliged to pay workers the national minimum wage: $5 a day. ""We need to be more competitive," said Ford union leader Juan Jose Sosa Arreola. "That's the truth. That's a reality." Once again, the truth hurts. Oh, and five Ford execs banked $60m last year. And Bill Ford's deferred millions await the fruit of Mexican labor.