Back in 1994, supremebrougham helped one of his old high school teachers shop for a car. [NB: “she’s really not old, she’s a vibrant and elegant 50-something that hasn’t changed a bit since the early 90’s.”] She ended-up buying a new Camry LE (not shown). And now she’s looking for another whip. She lives in central Florida (AWD need not apply) and she doesn’t want to spend over $30,000.
I have had an oil leak for about two years. A trust-worthy mechanic suggested I just let it go; just check and replenish the oil as needed. I just bought a new window motor, yet my locks are still unpredictable. Plus the passenger front handle broke off two weeks ago when a a passenger didn’t listen when I insisted that I needed time unlocking her door. I don’t want to put any more money into it. The lovely green machine has served me very well, but I am feeling just a tad unsure about taking it for rides entailing more than local traffic. What do you think of the CR-V or Rav4? Anything by Kia or Hyundai? I am not sure if I want a sedan or one of the little SUV’s. What do you think of the Camry hybrid? I have also noticed the good reviews on the Fusion lately!
I know I “raised” expectations with the previous post on the beautiful Charlene. And so I feel obliged—obliged I tell you—to provide the denouement to what could well be the sleaziest sexploitation perpetuated by anyone even remotely connected to the automotive industry. I think we can all learn a lesson here: lock up your daughters. And if any member or our B&B needs more vigorous instruction on this matter, Google “Standing and Modeling” using only the first letters of each word.
Who in their right minds thought that the United Auto Workers (UAW) rank and file would ratify a contract that included a no-strike clause? That would be like cutting off your balls to spite your penis. And so they haven’t (ratified the contract that is). Sure, Chrysler has one of them no-strike deals, but they’re dead in the water. Ford’s on its way back to profit! Ford’s CEO said so himself. Many times. As Alan Mulally and UAW Prez Ron Gettelfinger have learned, if you talk out of both sides of your mouth, you’re heading for a big old bitch slapping. On Friday, Big Ron told the Detroit Free Press that the UAW won’t return to the bargaining table if the measure was defeated. So Ford’s unionized work force will carry on as before, until the existing accord (so to speak) expires in 2011. The rejection will not play well with Ford’s investors, who were looking for the Blue Oval Boys to reduce their labor costs to match those of the transplants and cross-town welfare queens.
Automotive News [AN, sub] reckons it’s got the inside line on Toyota’s “new U.S. plan.” They’re so chuffed with the scoop that their article presents the bulleted battle plan in both the body text and a little gray box. And here it is: “Review and possibly trim the lineup of full-frame trucks; Skip midcycle vehicle enhancements to focus on bigger launches; Introduce more hybrids to North America; Give U.S. engineers a bigger voice in r&d.” AN reckons the headline is the potential truck trimming and hybrid adding bit. Which is certainly important news for a company with a “tattered image” (Toyota, apparently, not the American zombies clinging to profits via pickups, who’ve yet to produce a single large-volume hybrid vehicle). But what of ToMoCo leaving existing vehicles as is for longer?
By last Friday, it was clear that the United Auto Workers rank and file found their new, no-strike contract rank, and filed their objections during voting. In other words, the union’s members rejected the deal. Which left Ford CEO Alan Mulally’s rep seriously dinged. After all, Big Al’s been talking-up Ford’s return to profitability ever since he banked that first $25 million paycheck. The union vote against the strike was a vote for Big Al’s plan. If he’d kept his mouth shut or, better yet, constantly warned against looming collapse, the UAW might have made the ultimate concession. But then investors wouldn’t have dumped more money into Ford and the Ford family members signing Mulally’s big ass paychecks would have been seriously spooked. Big Al can’t win from losing, as the Brits would say.
I read the Autoblog headline—“Make it stop: Bad landau tops“—and I just knew Alex Nunez was the man responsible. Mr. Nunez earned my eternal admiration with his Knight Rider live blogging posts. I certainly don’t agree with his assertion that some Landau tops are acceptable. The phrase “a bad Landau top” is about as redundant/repetitive as you/one can get/be. Still, I’m getting the feeling that Alex has finally found a blog genre worthy of his dry-as-a-vermouthaphobic-martini humor. Here’s a taste of his Question of the Day thang: “Show us, say, a mid-to-late ’70s Olds Cutlass or Lincoln Town Coupe gussied up accordingly from the factory, and we’re liable to nod in approval and make one of those, ‘Ehh, not bad at all!’ facial expressions in appreciation of the old barge. That said, most modern landau roof applications are dealer-installed, and commensurately disastrous and stupid . . . Will anything ever stop these people?” Alex’s request for more examples of lame Landaus finds favor with Autoblog’s unmoderated mob. My favorite response after the jump.
The internet chatter on GM is growing more intense by the day. We’ve seen this before. For at least a decade, the company and its camp followers have mounted a disinformation campaign ahead of bad news. Only these days, there’s precious little good news with which GM’s spinmeisters can obfuscate. And critics of the nationalized automaker grow more vociferous by the day. Even the normally obsequious automotive press is no longer adverse to a little kicking-a-man-when-he’s-down routine (although any discussion of kicking GM to the curb is still the story’s Voldemort). New GM’s October sales numbers are about to hit the screens, and it ain’t gonna be pretty. GM’s first full financial report will emerge thereafter; the hard numbers on the company’s cash burn will trigger major mainstream media alarms and raise fresh (stale?) questions about GM’s viability. And then what? Will heads finally roll at RenCen? Will America’s automotive English patient continue to receive copious quantities of hospice care? Will the bailout issue bite Barack’s army in the ass come mid-term time? Meanwhile The Detroit News reports that tensions are simmering, . . .
Well he would say that, wouldn’t he? For one thing, David Cole is a Big Three scion, the son of former GM president Ed Cole. For another, Cole’s “Center for Automotive Research” (CAR) is funded by unspecified automobile manufacturers (guess who) and equally secret “labor organizations” (guess who). You may remember CAR as the organization whose statistically corrupt pre-bailout report took center stage, what with its wildly exaggerated predictions of plague, pestilence and famine—if the feds didn’t throw money at the ailing American automakers. And now Automotive News [AN sub] reports that David is telling Uncle Sam that New GM’s decision to cut thousands of dealers doesn’t make sense. “These cuts didn’t make any sense to me,” Cole told a government toady, whose visit may or may not have been stimulated by a missive impossible to the Presidential Task Force on Automobiles. “By pulling out, GM and Chrysler are giving a beachhead to Ford and some of the imports.” Beachhead? Dude, they’ve been eating Detroit’s lunch for decades. Anyway, speaking of pulling out . . . “Cole said he has no research expertise or experience with dealers, but that his personal interest in the issue was piqued and that he has spoken with a number of dealers and GM executives.” Glad to see that the guardians of our tax money are kow-towing—sorry “consulting” with all the right people in their endless pursuit of political accommodation.
The AP reports that Johnson City, TN police have arrested Christopher Walls on two counts of theft under $500. The Volunteer State po-po said the 41-year-old mechanic was tampering with parked cars at restaurants, then charging helpless, hapless owners to help start their sabotaged whips. “Police said Walls charged between $40 and $200 to get the vehicles running again. “Police suspect there are other victims. They’re urging anyone else who thinks they were scammed to call them.” They also said that anyone who receives an offer of on-the-spot mechanical assistance should be wary, and that a call from the Fraternal Order of Police asking for a contribution is in no way a similar sort of deal. Just kidding. They didn’t say that. At all. Wouldn’t even think to make the connection. Obviously.
Car dealers are some of the most politically connected people in America. As we reported yesterday, more than a few axed GM store owners demonstrated their political muscles by forcing the nationalized automaker to rescind their franchise terminations. Further back in time, we highlighted the Obama administration’s “stealth” dealer bailout: a car dealer-specific Small Business Administration (SBA) loan program. Under the program, the SBA guarantees 75 percent of a car dealer’s floor-plan line of credit, ranging from $500,000 to $2 million. The SBA’s network of private-sector lenders make the loans. In theory. In practice, it’s been what the Brits call a damp squib. Although Automotive News [AN, sub] fails to put any hard numbers to the program’s failure, they acknowledge that the SBA dealer deal “has had trouble attracting lender participation since its May launch.” Needless to say, the “answer” to the SBA lenders’ entirely understandable reticence/prudence is . . . bigger loans and more federal backing.
I was most gratified when the MSM adopted my nickname for then-GM Car Czar Bob Lutz, recognizing the crock of shit guy as Maximum Bob. (While they missed the irony, that only made it more delicious.) I’m now pleased to report (for my own selfish, ego-maniacal reasons) that the term “zombie”—as applied to Uncle Sam’s nationalized automaker and other bailout queens—may about to leave the TTAC orphanage for the big, wide world. Its champion: Senator Bob Corker of Tennessee. You may remember Corker as the only politician who pissed into Motown’s begging bowl, publicly grilling the Big Three’s CEOs when they jetted in to D.C. for a taste. (Thank you George Bush.) Here’s Corker’s press release on the Obama administration’s unspecified “request” for the next round of bailout bucks for GMAC. “Continuing life support to an institution like GMAC is a major mistake,” said Corker. “It creates enormous risk to taxpayers, is an inappropriate use of government subsidies to support jobs in a specific sector of the economy, and continually breathes new life into a zombie institution that should be seized and resolved. At what point are we going to stop propping up zombie institutions to support industrial policy through our banking system?” And here comes the right hook. . .
“We’re likely to have to put in less capital [to GMAC] than we expected,” U.S. Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner told the House of Representatives Financial Services Committee earlier today. Which raises six major questions. First, huh? GMAC has already received not one but two direct injections of federal taxpayer assistance. Why are we arguing over amounts rather than the question of whether or not we should draw a line under the fetid financier and call it quits? Second, when did Geithner’s mob/GMAC figure out that $12.5 billion wouldn’t be enough to keep the lame-ass lender afloat? Third, why hasn’t anyone been called on to the carpet (i.e. shit-canned) for underestimating the federal teat provision needed to prop-up these sub-prime pricks? Fourth, how much taxpayer money did U.S. Treasury Secretary think GMAC would need to stay afloat—you know; before he figured out that the meshugganah money men didn’t need quite so much? Fifth, how much new capital does GMAC need anyway? And sixth, why should we believe we will ever get this money back? Which brings us back to d’oh. “The only thing we’re doing is making sure we follow through on that commitment,” Geithner testified. Or, as the Brits would say, in for a penny, what’s yours is mine.
Recent Comments