Ford has been benefiting heavily from “good kid syndrome” lately. You know how it goes, as long as your behavior is marginally better than your sibling’s, you’re the good kid. Just ask the self-styled Autoextremist.

I believe that Ford will emerge as the largest and most profitable U.S. automaker and stay that way for the foreseeable future. They have the strongest management team (led by ex-Boeing executive Alan Mulally who is simply one of the best who has ever worked in this business), they have sensational products here and on the way (their new product cadence is extremely impressive and rivals that of any automaker in the business), and they are demonstrating signs of real momentum in an absolutely dreadful market. I expect Ford to be a global force to be reckoned with in this business for years to come.

Mr. Delorenzo isn’t wrong, per se. Ford’s management and products look downright promising . . . compared to the other Detroit firms. Which is like saying you’ve got the nicest Camaro in the trailer park. Meanwhile, far from the oracles of product cadence and “real momentum,” people are looking at Ford’s numbers, and the words “global force to be reckoned with” aren’t flowing off any of their keyboards.

Read More >

This morning, bankrupt automaker General Motors, their failed SAAB subsidiary, low-volume independent automaker Koenigsegg, and the Swedish government signed a deal for Saab’s future. Oh yeah, and some guy named Mark Bishop, an “American investor.” Who he? Can you say “junk bonds” and “sub-prime”? But before we look at Bishop’s CV, let’s break this deal down to its constituent parts . . .

Read More >

Ever since Farago’s fateful appearance on Autoline After Hours, I’ve been hooked on the weekly spectacle of Detroit-think. Talk about a fly on the bunker wall. Anyway, the Vines’s and DeLorenzos of this world never tire of talking about how the recent economic collapse was the sole cause of Detroit’s downfall (not true—see TTAC archives up to last year) and how “everyone is hurting right now.” The first assertion seeks to absolve Detroit of its systemic failures, while the second hopes to show that every automaker has sunk to the depths of, say, GM and Chrysler. Of course the second point is more true (for what it’s worth) than the first, but a few news items show that Toyota is succeeding admirably where GM and Chrysler have abjectly failed.

Read More >

Bob Lutz needs to clear something up. Fun lovers, report to GM Fastlane, stat! It seems that the Man of Maximum is steamed about a WaPo piece which he complains casts him as “ambivalent” towards his beloved Volt. In fact, the piece is a sweeping look at the Volt’s place in GM, and it contains more than a few anecdotes that reflect poorly on GM management (shocking, I know). And the facts of the matter clearly illustrate that the Volt’s importance arises from political considerations far more than the inherent passion  of GM’s product planners to create reliable, fuel-efficient transportation. Hence the accusation of ambivalence. But political motivation has to be disguised with pure intention (no matter how implausible) in order to work. And so Lutz is off to man the crumbling Maximum rampart.

Lutz writes,

The reporter said that we are “ambivalent” about the Volt, largely because it flies in the face of what he perceives me to be all about, namely speed, horsepower and burning rubber – and fossil fuels. In fact, he neatly expanded this ambivalence angle to describe GM, and Detroit as a whole, as the auto industry faces a new future.

Look, I know how it works. A reporter has a great idea for a story, with a terrific angle, and, even if the facts indicate otherwise, he can’t help but try to shoehorn the story into the angle. It’s just too good an idea!

Yes, Bob Lutz knows how the media thing works. And the WaPo juxtaposes the Volt and the Camaro,

. . . type of vehicle they and their colleagues in the press insist GM is all about, the gas guzzler. Trucks, SUVs and muscle cars. They would have you believe that GM and the other American auto companies are the only manufacturers on the planet that have ever built any SUVs. They would have you believe that we are secretly bemoaning the coming of the Volt because it means the end of cars like the Camaro and the Corvette, cars they don’t think any Americans want to drive anyway.

Huh? Bob, the Post quotes you as saying,

When you get out into the marketplace, it’s probably just 5 percent of the public that desperately wants something environmentally sound and is willing to pay a premium for it. I would say the East and West Coast intellectual establishment kind of lives in its own world. When you get to the broad American marketplace, excitement is still kind of defined in the way it used to be.

If that doesn’t betray some ambivalence towards hybrid vehicles, then what does? If America doesn’t want Volt, Bob, why are you building it? Actually, the Post piece addresses this directly, explaining,

In the summer of 2008, at a forum attended by other auto executives and then-presidential candidate Barack Obama, Wagoner recalibrated his position. Under increasing pressure from government officials to demonstrate GM’s broad commitment to more fuel-efficient vehicles, the beleaguered chief executive confidently restated GM’s goal to bring out the Volt in 2010.

But that doesn’t jive with Bob’s self-image. Political lackey he is not!

How many times since the concept car’s debut in 2007 have I said (and been widely quoted as saying) that this is the most exciting program I have worked on in my entire career? I meant it every time I said it – anyone in the press who’s spent any time at all covering the auto industry knows I don’t do “lip service.”

But if this were true, Lutz wouldn’t be blustering about his deep, abiding passion for the Volt. He’d say something along the lines of “you’re damn right I’m ambivalent about it. It’s a $40k halo car that doesn’t go fast or look like sex. That doesn’t make sense to someone like me.” Instead, he demonstrates his pathos-laden (and politically corect) ambivalence towards the very car the WaPo accuses him of favoring: the Camaro:

Given the tough economic times and the high priority of fuel economy, we were almost wishing we hadn’t done the Camaro. We looked at it as something radically mistimed.

Which it is. But Lutz’s conspicuous ambivalence only shows how willing he is to reshuffle his priorities based on political considerations. If Lutz was brought into GM to provide clear-sighted leadership on product quality, he has clearly lost the independent, instinctive edge he once promised. Absent the need for a working compass of the American consumer psyche (thanks to bailout billions), Lutz has become little more than a breathless apologist for a program he clearly doesn’t think will be successful on its own merits. The curse of governmental control can already be felt at GM. What a crock of shit.

Ford is starting to get pissed off at the feds for rewarding their cross-town rivals’ failure, taking bread off their table. On Monday, FoMoCo spinmeister Mark Truby pointed out that “If you’re competing against a company that’s majority owned by the U.S. government, that does raise certain concerns about what the competitive dynamic will be for the industry.” Translation: will Chrysler and GM use taxpayer money to keep customers from defecting to The Blue Oval Boyz (amongst others). Yes they can! The Associated Press reports that Chrysler is tapping into bailout bucks to launch a fresh round of incentives to keep pumping blood into the Auburn Hills automaker’s corpse: 0 percent financing for 60 months or up to $4,000 cash back on “certain” 2009 Chrysler, Dodge and Jeep models. Oh, and Chrysler owners get $1,000 loyalty cash towards a new 2008 or 2009 car. Yes, 2008. Chrysler says the promotion runs until July 1. At the least.

Bidders for Opel need to bump up their commitments to win control of GM’s European arm, Germany’s economic minister tells Automotive News [sub]. Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg’s announcement came shortly after meeting with Fiat CEO Sergio Marchionne in Berlin. Coincidence? Nein. Fiat has been looking at acquiring the Opel operations along the lines of its Chrysler takeover: financed by desperate governments rather than the automaker itself. “There’s no favorite,” says zu Guttenberg. “Everyone knows that improvements are still necessary.” And as incentive, zu Guttenberg is still floating the possibility of an Opel bankruptcy. If bidders don’t “make credible commitments to preserve German jobs and showed a willingness to assume greater risks,” Germany will allow Opel to fail. After all, what government would hand over an automaker being kept alive with tax money to a foreign firm with a public-money dowry on top? Only America, apparently. Still, the threat could be losing its impact as Germany is also anxious to decide on a bid offer this week. In the spirit of compromise, Fiat is now saying it would accept only €6 billion in German government loan guarantees instead of the €7 billion previously requested.

Automotive News [AN, sub] reports that ex-GM CEO Rick Wagoner missed out on a $39.2 million payday. We already knew about Red Ink Rick’s as-yet-unpaid $22.1 million pension fund. (The Presidential Task Force on Autos (PTFOA) won’t sign the company killer’s pension check for fear of an epic bailout backlash.) We now learn that the GM Board of Directors—an august body so deep in Wagoner’s pocket it nearly suffocated in lint—could have “awarded” Wagoner an additional $17.1 million in severance pay. Bailout regulations put paid to that bonanza. Wagoner also saw the value of his stock plummet from $93.62 a share to nearasdammit niente. Are we feeling sorry for Rick? During the GM lifer’s 17-year tenure as a senior executive, he banked some $9 million via stock options. I’ve yet to read about Rick’s total salary to date (he’s currently earning a buck a year) or the perks he will continue to enjoy into his dotage. As the Brits would say, I’m sure Rick’s not short a bob or two.

This one make more sense than the Mitsubishi and Saturn hook-up floated last week. Automotive News [sub] reports that Roger Penske thinks it’s a good idea to import Korean-built Renault-Samsung Motors vehicles to sell through the Saturn dealer network. (Apparently, Roger’s been en France kicking the idea around with Renault – Nissan CEO Carlos Ghosn.) Remember: I said more sense. Not a lot of sense. The details that would make this deal seem sensible are . . . uh . . . sketchy. “It’s not known which vehicles would be sold by Saturn or whether they would be current Samsung offerings or new ones based on Renault engineering. Also unclear: the corporate relationship between Penske and Renault-Nissan.” In the deal’s favor, the move might return Saturn to its roots as the first-time car buyer’s first port-of-call. Against, plenty. But it does back-up what we’ve been saying for some time: Renault – Nissan is sniffing around GM’s remains, looking for a tasty snack. Saturn or . . . the whole company? Watch this space.

Automotive News reports that bailout binging, eleventh-hour-back-room-rule-change bank (and former captive financier) GMAC has one set of rules for Chrysler dealers, another for GM’s. “Chrysler dealers must make monthly payments totaling 10 percent of the original outstanding balance on new vehicles that have been sitting on the dealership lot at least a year. [Plus a $25 “surcharge” per year-or-older car.] By contrast, GM dealers make monthly payments totaling 10 percent of the original balance on new vehicles that have sat on dealership lots at least 18 months. [Plus a $15 “surcharge” per year-or-older car.] Hey! Not fair! “And GMAC will finance just 80 percent of the purchase price when Chrysler dealers buy used vehicles at auction, compared with 100 percent for GM dealers.” Double not fair! GMAC’s reasoning (or lack thereof) after the jump.

Read More >

Fiat, RHJ International and Magna have all submitted bids for GM’s European unit, Opel. In an interview published today [reported by The New York Times], German economy minister Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg reserved the right to reject all three suitors, sending Opel into bachelor’s bankruptcy. “We must first have a high degree of certainty that the significant tax money we will have to provide is not lost,” KTzG pronounced. Roger that. All three offers depend on German financial backing; without which NONE of them will go forward. After those glad tidings hit the net, KTzG went into damage control mode. Speaking to journalists in Berlin, Mr. Guttenberg’s spokesman “clarified” his position: “we want to avoid bankruptcy, but bankruptcy has to be an option. Apparently, an “orderly insolvency” would “not be the end of the company.” Who’s the oxymoron now?

1. Floorplan costs The more dealers you have, the slower the inventory turn. The slower the turn, the longer it takes to repay the debt. The longer it takes to repay the debt, the more money that’s required. By cutting dealers, the manufacturers cut GMAC’s capital requirements, which run into the billions.

2. Inventory Excess inventory ties up capital and increases the burden of the floor plan, due to the longer sales cycle. (Chrysler and GM have far higher days of inventory than Toyota, Honda, BMW, et al. All that metal sitting around wastes a lot of money delaying the conversion of assets to cash). If the automakers have fewer dealers to serve they should be able to produce fewer vehicles.

3. Resale value More dealers means more competition within the brand which means lower transaction prices.

4. Profit at the dealer level One would hope that you end up with better dealers if they can make more money (although that’s debatable).

GM’s secured bondholders may not be getting the Chrysler treatment, but anyone still holding onto GM stock has another thing coming. US News & World Report has compiled a list of the 30 investors who stand to lose the most from the GM bankruptcy. They’re all big, evil banks and investment firms (California’s public retiree system being the big exception), so don’t expect anyone to shed a tear for them. Unless of course one of them happens to manage your retirement. Meanwhile, GM stock is still going up. Huh?

According to Forbes, German automaker Daimler has purchased a 10 percent stake in Silicon Valley’s EV sweetheart, Tesla Motors. “The two companies are already working together on using Tesla’s lithium-ion battery packs and charging electronics in Daimler’s electric version of its two-seat Smart car. The stake’s value was not disclosed, but [Daimler’s R&D meister Thomas] Weber said it was in the double-digit millions.” Don’t you just love it when German managers go all coy about their American acquisitions, like, say, when Daimler bought Chrysler? Of course, we mustn’t forget Musk. Announcing the news, Elon did what he does best: pile on the hype. “Tesla Chief Executive Elon Musk said in a statement that the partnership would help it bring the Tesla Model S car to production faster and ‘ensure that it is a superlative vehicle on all levels.'” Excuse me? Other than providing cash for battery packs for the Smart, where’s the bit about Mercedes helping Tesla develop the Model S? Oh maybe it’s something to do with this . . .

Read More >

I’m beginning to like the environment. First, the greens spiked Charles “Double Nickel” Hurley’s nomination for the top slot at the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). As we reported earlier, Hurley’s federal pension plans came a cropper for daring to suggest that larger cars were safer than fuel misers (at the IIHS, back in the day). Now, tree huggers have torpedoed the current cash-for-clunkers bill. Reuters reports that California Senator Dianne Feinstein, a friend of the Friends of the Earth, is not happy with the compromise cash-for-clunkers bill.

Read More >

“Today’s equity offering is another example of the fast, decisive action we are taking as we build momentum on our plan, including further progress on improving our balance sheet.” Well, he would say that, wouldn’t he? And now’s as good a time as any for Ford CEO Alan Mulally to cash-in some of his employer’s chips by selling 300 million shares of common stock. Ford’s stock price has tripled—from not very much to three times not a whole lot—since Chrysler filed for Chapter 11 and GM heads for same. And Ford needs a mountain of cash to honor their contract with the United Auto Workers. While the MSM is busy repeating Ford’s “we’re the only one not suckling on the federal teat” mantra, keep in mind that the sale should raise $1.8 billion or so, and we’re talking a $15 billion total obligation the union’s VEBA health care fund. The market knows: Ford’s stock sank nine percent today on the news of the offer. Still, as we’ve said all along, there’s something to be said for being the last man standing. The question is, what? Let’s hope it’s not “our turn.”