"Sources close to the Tata/Ford deal" have been busy little bees lately, shooting out sad little insights into the clunky sale of Jaguar and Land Rover. If we can believe these anonymous tipsters (and Reuters clearly does), the deal is done, and Ford will be announcing the sale tomorrow. One of these nameless, faceless dealmakers slapped down the suggestion that Ford would get $2.65b for the two brands, telling Indian TV "You have to come south from that (number) by quite a bit." But as with most leaks surrounding this deal, Tata reps refuse to play ball. "We have nothing to tell you now," they tell us. So is the deal happening tomorrow, or later, or not at all? With all of this conflicting information going around the media grapevine, we're not committing until the officially announcement, and maybe not even then (show me the money). Yea or nay, the fine print on this deal or no deal should make some very interesting reading.

Les Alexander is a money man (bond trader) who owns the Houston Rockets. Billy Joe "Red" McCombs co-founded Clear Channel Communications and owns a huge network of Texan dealerships and aftermarket auto parts businesses. The Houston Business Journal [via Mlive.com] reports that the two men have bought a ten to fifteen percent share in the Chinese automaker Brilliance, for a cool $100m. McCombs wants Brilliance to use the money to develop Chinese dealership networks, auto financing, used car operations and Internet auto sales. "There's huge opportunities in China for companies to set up aftermarket services like leasing, vehicle loans and extended warranties," says Charles Child, International Editor of Automotive News. "All the kinds of things that U.S. car shoppers are offered every day." If the venture is successful and market share grows, Brilliance hopes to import cars to the United States "at prices under those for the Korean Hyundai and Kia brands." Yeehaw! Or should I say Ni Hao!

Trading Markets reports that Kia shares dropped five percent yesterday after news emerged that its CEO would be stepping down. Unnamed analysts assure us that Chung Eui-sun left his position due to "poor earnings." But it's more likely a PR move for the Chung family. Ei-sun's father Chung Mong-koo narrowly held onto his position as Chairman of Hyundai-Kia after an embezzlement conviction and stockholder revolt. The Kia presidency is likely seen as an acceptable loss in exchange for some public goodwill, as Chung Ei-sun was widely expected to succeed his father at the top of the Hyundai-Kia food chain. Regardless of the weird Korean nepotism angles, Kia is in some financial trouble at the moment. Just before the announcement of Chung's resignation, Goldman Sachs released warnings about Kia's productivity and profitability. Is it me or would this make a terrific TV series?

Citigroup says $3.29 a gallon for gasoline is cheap. Why? (Read: are they nuts?) As Bloomberg reports, due to complexities of current supply and demand, gasoline may actually cost less than the oil it is refined from. Last week on the New York Mercantile Exchange, wholesale gasoline cost 50.4 cents less per barrel than crude oil– for only the fifth time in 20 years. Credit speculation on the differential between crude prices, gasoline futures and heating oil futures. Traders call this differential the 3-2-1 "crack spread," in which three barrels of oil is refined into two barrels of gasoline and one of heating oil. On March 17, the 3-2-1 sank to $7.395 and the straight gasoline-to-crude spread dipped below zero. Both rebounded later in the week, but, "Everything that we knew about crack spreads has fallen apart with the gasoline supply glut and the shortage of diesel," said Francisco Blanch, London head of global commodities research for Merrill Lynch. "I have been a bit reluctant to make calls on this thing. It's so volatile." Nevertheless, gas pump prices are expected to increase with summer driving demand and limits on production by profit-hungry refiners.

For the second time in a week (clock analogy again), Bob Lutz made an accurate prediction. GM's Car Czar told journalists he'd like to put a 200 horse turbocharged four in a big car, tuned for torque and fuel economy. Sounds like a good idea. So good, Audi's doing it… The current Audi A4 has a great engine– the 2.0T–  that's most useful with either a manual transmission or DSG. But since some 80 percent or more of the A4 2.0T sold in America have a slushbox (six-speed or CVT), acceleration is less than idea (i.e. slow). So Audi's boffins bumped-up the horsepower (from 200 to 211) and added scads 'o torque (from 207 lb ft now to 258 ft.-lbs.). That's more torque than Audi's 3.2-liter V6 provides. If Audi really wanted to test the turbocharged waters for Maximum Bob's dream (nightmare?) of big ass cars with 200 horses, Ingolstadt should offer Yanks the revised 2.0T in the A6. You can just hear the bankers whining. "I'm not spending 55 grand on a car with four cylinder engine!"

We Americans like to think that much of our industrial and economic success is a result of a free market and private ownership. Russia's experience with unbridled capitalism has engendered more mixed feelings, and with them a Kremlin-centric approach to economic development. The Wall Street Journal documents the decline of Russian automaker AvtoVAZ into corruption, kleptomania and crime under free-market conditions in the 1990's, and the government intervention which attracted Renault's recent purchase of 25 percent of the company. These government takeovers not only tend to make Russian companies more efficient and less crime-ridden (although this assertion may be suspect), they also serve the political ends of eliminating wealthy oligarchs who could pose a challenge to President Putin's growing authoritarianism. With "plans to float stakes in a raft of companies it has taken over," the Kremlin may just be headed toward yet another radical economic experiment for the country that has witnessed more than its fair share of experimental economics. But will western companies and authoritarian state-run companies mesh over the long-term?

In The Wall Street Journal [sub], Daimler CEO Dieter Zetsche and GM Car Czar Bob Lutz discuss their respective companies' approach to environmentally-friendly vehicles. Dr Z wants to sell more diesels. (And there you have it.) Maximum Bob eschews oil burners to hang his proverbial hat on E85. Of course, Lutz' preference for corn juice will cost consumers plenty through government spending on ethanol infrastructure and corn price supports. But the winner of TTAC's first annual Bob Lutz Award reckons developments in corn breeding will blunt E85's inflationary impact on food prices. "So I think that people who say, well, the ethanol industry is taking food from the mouths of babies and it's driving tortilla prices up– I think these are highly suspect conclusions." Meanwhile, both executives say Daimler's success selling the smart in the U.S. heralds the end of the efficiency vs safety debate. "There are no statistics that would support [the idea] that you are less safe in the smart than you are in any kind of vehicle," says Dr Z. Lutz appears equally oblivious the laws of physics, stating "If a vehicle is registered for sale in any developed market of the world, it is going to be an extremely safe vehicle."

Here's a story with a number of improbabilities: Ford developing anything new, Ford putting money in rear wheel-drive (RWD) and any manufacturer developing a new car right here in the U.S. But with a weak dollar compared to other sites of engineering and manufacture– Europe or Australia– American R&D and production makes sense. As for the other parts of this story from the Detroit News, it's anybody's guess. Does Ford need a new RWD platform? They are, in fact, bound to make the Mustang for the rest of time, and it has to be RWD. To that end, FoMoCo might as well maximize economies of scale and use the 'Stang platform to underpin some other cars. And we don't know how "new" this new platform will be. It could be a yet-again-revised version of the Mustang's current platform, or it could be a version of Australia's Ford Falcon platform– no spring chicken itself. Using the Australian platform straight-up is out of the question; it's RHD only. As an enthusiast, an announcement like this is exciting. As a bean counter, it's dumber than a box of hair. Ford should put this money into their bread and butter cars, like the next generation Ford Taurus. 

The line of succession at Ford Motor Company doesn't have a Ford in it (surprise!). In an interview with Automotive News [sub] last week, Ford personnel chief Joe Laymon laid out the short list for the next CEO. Of course, the board of directors has the right to consider other than these candidates, but the self-proclaimed "owner of Ford's succession-planning process" said CEO Alan Mulally asked him to identify those within the corporate structure worthy of ascension to the throne. Not surprisingly, "Mullet" Mark Fields is on the list; when asked to comment on his chances of making it to the top, he stated "I am not going to go there…I am not focused at all on things like the succession race. We [note the change to the "royal we"] are focusing on doing our jobs." And of course, Big Al's favorite Toyota ex-pat Jim Farley made it. Assuming the proper "aw shucks" attitude, he humbly commented "You earn those opportunities. Right now, I haven't done anything." [At least he admits it; honesty has to count for something.] The other four in the running are Lewis Booth (VP for Ford of Europe and what's left of the PAG), Joe Hinrichs (VP of global manufacturing), Don Leclair (CFO), and Stephen Odell (COO, Ford of Europe). So who will it be when Mulally's five-year contract runs out in 2011? Just as with GM, watch to see who they move into the corporate COO position next.

Neurologist-turned-electric-car-expert Lyle Dennis had a private audience with Jon Lauckner, Bob Lutz' lackey "first deputy." Dr. Dennis inquired about the "expected timing, location, and cadence of ramp-up for initial Chevy Volt production." The good doctor wondered if GM is going to roll out the production Volt with "with a small fleet … or… release it like you did the new non-hybrid Malibu?" Lauckner replied that GM's going to introduce the electric – gas hybrid gradually. "Selected people" [read: GM employees] will drive pre-production versions before GM gradually brings the Volt to a Chevy showroom near… someone. Lauckner didn't mention the effect of this plan on the Volt's production date. And his comment represents an about face from previous statements about the Volt's debut: "It makes no sense if you're ramping up production to have people frustrated because the car is in theory able to be sold in every area but they cant get their hands on one because the amount of volume is relatively small." Such as… the Chevrolet Malibu and Buick Enclave launches? [thanks to KixStart for the link]

As talks between American Axle and the UAW continue, AA has moved some of the production for GM's large SUV axles to Mexico. They've also moved axle production for Chrysler's pickups and SUVs South of the Border, allowing Chrysler to continue turning out Dakotas and Durangos nobody wants without interruption. The Detroit Free Press cites industry experts who predict that by the end of the month, the auto industry will have lost over 100k units in productivity which they'll never recover due to soft SUV and pickup sales. Whether the Mexican move is permanent or just a warning shot across the UAW's bow remains to be seen. But the AA workers who are now living on $200/week strike pay better hope the union bends a little, and soon. Otherwise they could be on the unemployment line instead of the picket line.

Ford wants its workers to connect with their future. And now GM is encouraging their employees to "build your future and live your dream." According to The Detroit News, specialists will show up at GM's factories across the nation to hold "opportunity expos" to beg show workers "the ways in which they can benefit" by giving up their well-paying jobs with great benefits for a few thousand dollars and the opportunity to take their chances on the job market. To try to entice people to show up, they're also entering anyone who comes to the seminar into a drawing for a $15k voucher towards a new GM vehicle. Meanwhile, Chrysler is reopening their buyout programs and offering employees who've already said "no" the chance to say "HELL NO." Some employees are confused as to why they're doing it. Comments posted on the Detroit Free Press' site show that not everyone who put in for Chrysler's buyout is given the buyout. One commenter stated "…there were just under 300 people at the Belvidere Assembly Plant who put in for the buy-out. Only approximately 200 of us were given the buy-out." Another commenter asks when they'd see a corresponding reduction in management, adding "most of the work done by management was once done by UNION clerical personel, and for a damned sight less money." It looks like The Big 2.8 still have a lot of work to do if they're counting on dumping old employees and hiring cheaper replacements to balance the books.

According to Contra Costa Times, tonight's public hearing at the Richmond, CA city council chamber is likely to be "packed and emotionally charged." Before Chevron can upgrade its local refinery, the Planning Commission must decide whether an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) issued in January is complete. The oil company wants to use new equipment to refine a wider range of crude into gasoline. Refinery reps say the upgrades would make the refinery more reliable and efficient, and create about 1.2k (temporary) construction jobs. Critics want an EIR do-over; they fear Chevron would process crude oil that's "more contaminated," increasing pollution for residents and wildlife. Chevron says uh-uh, and points out the refined refinery will make the "cleanest fuel in the world." Even if Richmond approves the deal, Chevron must then secure permits from the Bay Area Air Quality Management District and the California Energy Commission. Year three of Chevron's effort continues.

MarketWatch reports that GM is going to business with Uzbekistan's state-owned automaker Uzavtosanoat (pronunciation anyone?). GM VP Eric Stevens said the new joint venture, General Motors Uzbekistan, would boost economic growth in the former Soviet state and provide GM with "a real opportunity" to grow in Central and Eastern Europe. The venture will utilize an existing Uzbek factory and will produce up to 250,000 Chevy Epicas, Captivas and Tacumas. Meanwhile, Human Rights Watch (no relation) reports that all kinds of awful things happen in Uzbekistan. Look for GM to trumpet this fact in forthcoming "corporate responsibility" press releases. !

Another day, another hybrid prognostication from Maximum Bob Lutz. We reported yesterday that Lutz said that one-third of GM's sales would have to be hybrids by 2015 to meet CAFE standards. Overnight Lutz has maximized his vision to 80 percent hybrid sales by 2020. The Freep reports Lutz spouting such cheery bromides as "Ultimately by 2020 we figure that 80% of vehicles will require some sort of hybridization. We cannot get to 35 miles per gallon with anything resembling the current product portfolio with anything resembling current technology." Gee Bob, ya think? To be fair, we know that all this CAFE standards talk isn't really the Car Czar's forte. In fact, it seems like just talking about it is making the poor guy depressed. "Around 2015 we're going to have to sell a ton of hybrids whether people want them or not," Lutz told the Detroit News. "It's basically going to result in the quasi-disappearance of V-8 engines." Now that doesn't sound like the Maximum Bob we know and love.