Thursday, September 30, 2010

Influential Figures

One of the automotive industry's greatest icons is Henry Ford. Beginning with the Model T, Ford was able to provide Americans with practical yet affordable vehicles. The Model T became an ubiquitous symbol of wealth and being an American. Taken on family picnics and even to Sunday mass, the Model T became Henry Ford's golden ticket into automotive stardom. One of greatest ideas was the implementation of the assembly line to begin the mass production. The concept behind an assembly line went that workers would be given specific sections along a line where their responsibility consisted of one section of the production of a vehicle. The assembly line was able to increase production and reduce average production time.
Had it not been for Henry Ford's three concepts that drove his company toward excellence, "reasonable price, reliability, and efficiency", Ford might not be the company it is today (hmfgv.org).
Ford's cars were so affordable, not only was he able to turn America into a nation of automotive drivers overnight, but "by 1918, half of all cars in America were Model Ts" (hmfgv.org). The surprising fact remains that there were engineers who had created self-propelled vehicles before Ford, none of them , however, were able to match Ford's mass production of vehicles. 
I believe that Henry Ford is one of the automotive industries great icons and tributes. Hence, America should build the Ford memorial right next to the Lincoln memorial. 
- Paul Jung

Pictures were acquired from google.com

Wednesday, September 29, 2010

China plans for being green.

As reported in the Wall Street Journal on September 16, 2010, China's Ministry of Industry and Information Technology is preparing a plan to make China the "the world's leader" in developing and producing battery-powered cars and hybrids. China expects to achieve its goal by acquiring technology from multinationals by forcing them to form joint ventures with Chinese companies if they want to produce key energy components in China. Because China is an indispensable market for multinationals and costs to import these components to China are too great, companies would feel the need to produce these components in China.

Companies are now caught between losing technology or losing the biggest market to sell cars. Most likely, multinationals will be forced to comply with china's rules, and China will become a leader in the electric car segment. As reported in the Wall Street Journal article, China projects to have five million electric cars and plug-in hybrids on the roads by 2020. For that, they plan to invest as much as 100 billion yuan, or about $15 billion, in areas such as charging stations and other infrastructure. In 10 years from now, China could become a prototype for what could be the our future, a world moved entirely by electric cars.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704394704575495480368918268.html

The Toyota Way

Toyota is not just a leader in the automotive industry; it is also influential in the world of business management. "The Toyota Way," as it is called, is the set of principles and leadership techniques that Toyota uses throughout its global operations.

Here are the fourteen principles (from the book The Toyota Way: 14 management principles from the world's greatest manufacturer, available for preview at http://books.google.com/books?id=9v_sxqERqvMC&lpg=PP1&ots=g6SVeCsLKA&dq=The%20toyota%20way&pg=PA1#v=onepage&q&f=false):

  1. Base your management decisions on a long-term philosophy, even at the expense of short-term financial goals.
  2. Create a continuous process flow to bring problems to the surface.
  3. Use "pull" systems to avoid overproduction.
  4. Level out the workload (be the tortoise, no the hare)
  5. Build a culture of stopping to fix problems and get quality right the first time.
  6. Standardized tasks and processes are the foundation for continuous improvement and employee empowerment.
  7. Use visual control so no problems are hidden.
  8. Use only reliable, thoroughly tested technology that serves your people and processes.
  9. Grow leaders who thoroughly understand the work, live the philosophy, and teach it to others.
  10. Develop exceptional people and teams who follow your company's philosophy.
  11. Respect your extended network of partners and suppliers by challenging them and helping them improve.
  12. Go and see for yourself to thoroughly understand the situation.
  13. Make decisions slowly by consensus, thoroughly considering all options; implement decisions rapidly.
  14. Become a learning organization through relentless reflection and continuous improvement.
I believe that these principles are a large part of Toyota's success. Despite the recent recalls and runaway RAV4s, Toyota remains the worlds number one automaker. In light of the recalls and evidence of Toyota trying to cover up the problem, some of these principles may seem a bit ironic. However, that in no way reduces their importance in explaining Toyota's success.

Many other business managers and supervisors have implemented the Toyota Way. These principles apply to any industry that seeks to have more effective management and long-term success.

Toyota has become an influential leader in the auto industry by following these principles. And by proving the success of these principles, they have become one of the most influential companies in the world, as more and more executives mimic the Toyota Way.

GM and other car companies should do themselves a favor and adopt these principles. Just don't ignore them when it's convenient, as Toyota did during the recall scandal. A runaway Camry is one thing, but a runaway Escalade would be even more frightening.

Tuesday, September 28, 2010

German Cheapineered

In the last few months, editors, critics and industry leaders have been talking about the new strategy of Volkswagen in the US. As reported by the Wall Street Journal, VW wants to triple their sales in the US by 2018 and they want to compete with the likes of Toyota and Honda.

The first car in this new plan is the 2011 Jetta, which was reviewed by the Wall Street Journal on the 17th of September. The review is by no means glowing as it compares the new car to cheap and trendy H&M clothing. The problem, from what VW executives could see, was the price of the outgoing Jetta. At a base price of $17,735, the old Jetta was about almost $2,000 more expensive than the base line Civic or Corolla. The new Jetta now fits in very nicely with of $15,995. To get to that price a lot was taken off. The new Jetta is now comes with an old 2.0 Liter engine, no rear independent suspension and a hard plastic interior. Further attempting to compete with Toyota and Honda, the new Jetta is, perhaps, the most generic looking Volkswagen in recent history.

Hearing this news all throughout the summer has been a little depressing for me. Firstly, it is very counterintuitive to have a new version of a model come out and be blatantly worse the one before it. I guess I am just used to models improving with each design iteration. Secondly, I used to want a nice Jetta but I really would not want the new 2011 model. Like many other VW fans, I liked VWs because they were not Toyota Corollas or Honda Civics which seem to fill every driveway and parking lot in America. Perhaps Volkswagen is forgetting why they have such a loyal following as they search for higher unit sales. Real VW fans bought Jettas because they quality, German engineered and fun to drive. I wonder if VW is alienating their most loyal fans, who have been walking into VW dealerships for years, as they try to become a more mainstream and dominant player in the industry.

Thursday, September 23, 2010

Tesla Motor Company

Tesla is a relatively new automobile company that has emerged in the past five years. Tesla is a Silicon - Valley based company that manufactures electric vehicles. The innovative feature about Tesla's motor vehicles are their style, "green - conscious", and practicality.

Tesla's emergence has brought about an increased effort in the automotive industry as a whole to produce electric vehicles that not only run essentially on batteries but are able to provide drivers an exciting time while behind the wheel. Tesla wants to shatter the general assumption that electric vehicles are all like Toyota Priuses. No consumer wants to drive an ogre of a vehicle that is impossible to get a speeding ticket in. Tesla's first production electric vehicle, in fact, the Roadster is able to drive from 0 - 60 mph in 3.9 seconds.The one downside to the Roadster is its base price of $109,000.

Nonetheless, companies in the automobile industry look at Tesla's Roadster as a major accomplishment. In the following link, (http://www.lincah.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/2010-TAG-Heuer-Tesla-Roadster-Front-Side-View-588x441.jpg) consumers begin to understand why. Sleek, stylish and eco-conscious, the Tesla has begun to dominate the Supercar electric vehicle market.

Just recently, Tesla announced that it would be partnering with Toyota to begin building electric vehicles in the United States. With Toyota's solid $50 million dollar investment, 1,000 new employees will be hired and begin the production of the new Model S. Tesla CEO Elon Musk states that the Model S, which will be ready by the year 2012, will produce 20,000 cars. Eventually, Tesla's CEO states, that the whole operation will involve over 10,000 employees. (http://www.autoweek.com/article/20100520/GREEN/100529968)

The emergence of Tesla has invoked hugely profitable companies such as Toyota to actually go ahead with a partnership. Toyota realizes that the market is headed towards a green market and has gone ahead to merge with Tesla. Newly emerging auto companies like Tesla that center their products around consumers interests (i.e. sustainability and conservation of the environment) already have a foot in the game before they enter. While Tesla already has green vehicles in production, established companies like BMW, Mercedes, and Lexus are still playing catchup. Tesla certainly hasn't begun a new trend in the automotive market, but has jumped in the right time with the right product. As long as it continues to innovate and satisfy the newly emerging consumer trends, it will be able to stay on top of its game.

Wednesday, September 22, 2010


Image from ecomodder.com

A recent entrant to the auto industry has been electric-car manufacturer, Tesla Motors. Tesla became the first auto company to offer an IPO since Ford in 1956. Amid a volatile wall street, the company did better than expected when they sold 13.3 million shares at $17 dollars per share (Welsh).

The company has been selling small electric sports cars for several years and has showcased the potential of electric cars in performance and speed (Welsh). The Tesla Roadster, as it is named, sells for $100,000 and only comes with two seats. However, the company is working on a new model in coordination with Toyota, known as the Model S, which will be significantly less expensive and will come as a sedan for practicality. Developing new and technologically advanced new designs requires huge sums of money, including 465 million dollars in federal loans and the company is not expected to make a profit until they begin to sell the new Model S (Tesla).

While I would love to see new auto makers succeed in the market, developing such an advanced vehicle is a daunting task, even for established companies with huge engineering departments. While working with Toyota is a good sign, Tesla and its main competitor, Fisker, have consistently pushed further back production dates and other timeline landmarks. I suspect those who are investing in Tesla are doing so in the hopes of capturing an untapped market of those willing to pay a lot for electric cars, but I believe too many are assuming that companies like Tesla or Fisker will ever get their cars in owners’ driveways.
I also suspect companies like Toyota are partnering with Tesla in hopes of sharing technology that Tesla has learned in batteries and electric motors. My main doubts for the Model S stem from the fact that the car is a completely new design. Tesla only had to worry about the battery and electric motor for the roadster as most other components came from Lotus (Ricketts). Now Tesla has to think about everything from the steering wheel design to the chassis.

Works Cited
Ricketts, Camille. "Tesla Extends Roadster’s Lifespan with New Lotus Deal." GreenBeat. VentureBeat, 29 Mar. 2010. Web. 22 Sept. 2010. .
"Tesla Motors." The New Yrok Times. 29 June 2010. Web. 22 Sept. 2010. .
Welsh, Jonathan. "TSLA: What Does Tesla’s IPO Mean for the Future of Electric Cars?" The Wall Street Journal. 29 June 2010. Web. 22 Sept. 2010. .

Li-ion Motors

Li-ion Motors Corporation is a high-tech company that is " focusing [its] resources and efforts on the development, manufacturing and marketing of high speed lithium-powered vehicles" (http://www.li-ionmotors.com/about.php)

Although incorporated in April 2000, Li-ion Motors (Li-ion is short for lithium ion, the type of battery used to power electric cars) emerged in the industry after 2003, when they began to develop a "patented state-of-the-art Battery Management System (BMS)."(same source as above)

On September 16th, Li-ion was awarded the Progressive Automotive X-Prize for the Alternative Side By Side class(same source as above).

By winning the award, Li-ion was caught the attention of the automotive establishment. According to the company's website:

Automotive manufacturing giants, like Nissan and GM, have spent tens of millions of dollars on EV innovations and will still have to fine tune their technology before making it available to the public. For other manufacturers, licensing Li-ion’s technology will save them the millions of dollars, eliminate years of research and development, and will result in a state-of-the-art, fully functional, tested and proven prototype within four months of licensing.



The site also references the BP oil spill and how their technology reduces the need to consume oil.

At this point, the competitive landscape has not been changed much by this company, but I expect that, after winning the X-Prize, auto companies might consider working with Li-ion to develop an efficient electric vehicle. Electric vehicles are becoming an ever more important part of the automotive industry, and consumers can expect more electric vehicles to come on the market in the next decade. Li-ion will be part of this, giving automotive companies an easier way to produce electric vehicles by reducing the need for research and development.

In the future, this company and others like it will give auto manufacturers a less-expensive alternative to the kind of R&D that GM and Nissan did to create the Volt and Leaf, respectively.

Sunday, September 19, 2010

Interesting Info

Some interesting info I found while researching for the finance lab. I thought I'd share this with the group, since it wasn't really relevant to the project but could be relevant down the road:

Automakers disclose three important monthly statistics that indicate financial performance:

1. Motor vehicle production: This indicator shows how many units auto companies have produced in a given month. If production is increasing, auto companies may be spending more money to produce vehicles, hiring more workers, adding shifts to manufacturing plants, and anticipating greater sales volume.

2. Retail sales: This shows the amount of auto sales by a company’s affiliated dealerships. Greater sales volume can be compared to manufacturing volume to determine if a company is producing too few vehicles to meet demand or producing too many. In the first case, too few vehicles will raise the price (this was seen during the Prius’ heyday, when dealers would mark up the price due to high demand and low supply), and in the second case, too many vehicles will result in price reductions by both company and dealerships, leading to lower profits (an example is the large employee discount that GM gave to consumers to purchase GM vehicles).

3. Dealer inventories: This figure shows how many vehicles dealers have on hand. If cars are sitting on the lot and not selling, this not only hurts the dealer but also the manufacturer, by increasing manufacturer inventories and possibly leading to a reduction in production Automakers will also increase marketing efforts if a particular model is not selling as expected.

Thursday, September 16, 2010

The Ethics of Business

The automotive industry is one of the worlds largest industries. According to the 2007 DOT study, there are an estimated 254.4 million cars on the road compared to a U.S. population of 307,006,550 from the U.S. census bureau July 2009. The automotive industry holds enough stake in the U.S. market that their actions induce a ripple that travels to all drivers and passengers of automobiles. One great example is Toyota. Toyota was one of the first car companies in the U.S. to introduce a practical yet affordable hybrid vehicle. Sales were great and exceeded expectation. Then on August 26, 2010 Toyota announced that they would recall approxiamately 1.13 million 05 - 08 models. It not sure whether Toyota knew beforehand whether the gas pedals would get stuck. Nevertheless, Toyota's mistake in providing shoddy material to manufacture parts lead to deaths of innocent victims such as Mark Saylor's family. "Mark Saylor, his wife, child and brother-in-law Chris Lastrella were all killed in a car crash apparently caused by a faulty Toyota accelerator" (Mail Online).
Business ethics are an integral aspect of the automotive industry. It can be stated both ways that Toyota did or didn't pertain foresight to these incidents. However, had they decided to focus on providing customers quality accelerators made of quality material rather than focus on increasing revenue Mark Saylor's family might not have died. There must be an equal balance of business ethics and profit interests. For the survivors of Mark Saylor's family, Toyota is to blame for Mark's death, but is it also capitalism's?

- Paul Jung








.

Traffic and Money?

Traffic. One of the most hated things by Americans. Its boring, its long and you always get to your destination late. There's no reason for anyone to like traffics. Traffics cause drivers grief and agony.

With an increasing amount of constructions around the nation, freeways and highways are always getting backed up. In addition, the number of drivers increases each day in the U.S. exponentially. With more cars and with less road to drive on a serious problem plagues our roads. The major disadvantages is that drivers waste gas.

Of course its bad to waste gas because drivers will have to spend more money and it pollutes the environment, but it also means that drivers will be less prone to go out on road trips and invest in their cars. This then leads to less profits for car companies. I think that the automotive industry can work on two things about the traffic problem. First, the automotive industry should deal with easing boredom drivers have during traffic jams. Second, the industry should focus on making cars that can save gas when it senses the car is not moving.

Of course these are two things that will be very difficult to solve. If they are able to tackle this situation I believe that they can generate a lot of profits.  

Wednesday, September 15, 2010

Green commitment: an ethical issue? By Felipe Faria

The world as a whole is entering a new era of consumption responsibility and commitment to the environment. As automakers start producing more fuel-efficient cars and begin investing in new fuel alternatives for gasoline, it is important to analyze the actual role that auto companies have in promoting the production of cleaner, smarter, and more efficient cars in the years to come.

Isn’t a matter of ethics whether a company chooses to be environmentally responsible or not? My opinion is yes, it is. In the same way companies commit to social causes, they should also try to be as environmentally friendly as possible. Because automobile is a product responsible for releasing tons of CO2 gas into our atmosphere everyday, affecting the entire population, automakers should do everything within their power to minimize their impact in the environment. That includes investing in research and technologies that enable the development of cars that are more fuel-efficient and less dependent on oil, which is a finite and expensive fuel.

As we see many companies already starting to invest in "green" technologies, we should wonder if this move is driven by a sense of responsibility and care for the environment or simply because there is a market for it.

The Ethical Issues Surrounding Dealer Closures and Bailouts

In the midst of all the restructuring, taxpayer-funded bailouts, and bankruptcy, General Motors and Chrysler decided to alter their dealer networks, closing down hundreds of dealerships in the process. In 2009, GM vowed to close four-hundred dealerships per year until 2012 in an attempt to increase company profitability. In the U.S., GM has over 6,000 dealers, compared to Toyota with about 2,000.

According to GM's viability plan presented to Congress, the company would like to reduce the number of dealerships to 4,000. However, GM made a surprising decision recently. From edmunds.com:

GM recently reinstated many dealerships that were previously notified of franchise agreement terminations. On March 8, 2010, GM contacted 661 dealerships to negotiate terms of retaining the franchises. Other dealers contested the franchise agreement terminations through an arbitration process that ended on August 5, 2010.


Chrysler, also needing to thin its dealer network, cut the franchise agreement with 789 of its dealers.

For many families who depend on these dealership for their livelihood, the news has been devastating. However, families do not have to completely close their dealerships, rather, they can continue to sell used cars and perform automotive maintenance, which is how dealers already make the bulk of their cash. New car sales just create more potential service customers in the future.

Why is this an ethical issue within the industry?

Many dealer owners and customers have questioned the methods used to close dealerships. Some conservative commentators suggested the closings were politically based, since the government owns a majority of the company and the majority of the closures were in districts held by Republicans. Additionally, some questioned how GM could measure if a dealer was under-performing, since some dealerships, particularly in rural areas, were bound to have relatively low sales numbers.

Luckily, in June of 2009, some 50 smaller dealerships originally marked to be closed were spared, followed by more announcements that the dealership closures would be further minimized, like the information reported from edmunds.com above.

I believe that it was unethical for GM to close down so many dealerships so quickly. They were doing this not because it was a good business decision, but because of arm twisting from Washington. Should GM close some dealers? Sure, but widespread closures would not engender much good will among the American people, already furious over the bailouts for GM and Chrysler.

As for Chrysler, they had to close down some dealerships as well, but they have less than GM so the closures would not be as widespread. Still, many dealerships from both companies have gone under, especially former Saturn dealers who suffered when the brand was shut down.

Jalopnik has chronicled the abandoned dealerships with a picture slideshow. As you can see from the pictures, the empty showrooms are a strong reminder of how failed policies and bloated brands can bring down an automotive empire.

This is an ethical issue that has arisen just recently, as GM and Chrysler battled though bankruptcy and emerged trim and debt-free, thanks to an expedited Chapter 11 process. Many consumers have responded to the auto bailout by buying Ford products. Ford is an American brand that, unlike GM and Chrysler, had the foresight to bring in a gifted Chief Executive, Alan Mulally, formerly of Boeing, to help make the brand competitive and financially stable. Ford had succeeded and remained free of government ownership.

In my view, it is unethical for a business to put itself in the position that GM and Chrysler found themselves, in need of a government bailout. Why couldn't the companies just file for bankruptcy like everyone else and get it over with. We were told by executives at both companies that the bailout would keep them out of bankruptcy, yet that didn't happen. I don't blame Americans for driving Fords instead of GM and Chrysler products.

Ford has shown corporate responsibility by not taking government money when that was the easy thing to do. In return, customers have rewarded the publicly-traded corporation by purchasing its products, and Wall Street has rewarded it by driving stock prices to nearly $12 a share most recently, up from a 52-week low of $6.61.

The Age of Recalls By Chris Roberts

In a September 14th article from The Wall Street Journal, It was reported that the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is investigating a possible fault in the straps that hold fuel tanks in 1997 to 2001 Ford F-150 trucks. 32 complaints have been filled with the NHTSA which prompted the investigation. While these investigations are normal, the age of the vehicles brings up an important question. How long do auto manufacturers have to support their products and offer recalls? Officially, the NHTSA requires automakers to provide needed recalls for vehicles up to 10 years in age.

Considering business ethics, should a company only support their product for a set amount of time? I believe they should only support products for 10 years which is the age most people associate with the very end of a car’s life, for most situations. More importantly, I believed this number is set because automakers should not be responsible for a vehicle which has been on the roads for ten years. Over those years the vehicle could have been in a flood, rusted in a used car dealer, been aggressively driven or inappropriately repaired. All these situations could lead to problems that should not be traced to the original manufacturing of the vehicle. Auto makers should not be held responsible for older vehicles when the fault deals with rust, corrosion or other aging traits.

However, if the flaw is inherent in the design, such as a faulty safety feature, the company should be responsible no matter the age of the vehicle.

http://blogs.wsj.com/drivers-seat/2010/09/14/safety-agency-is-investigating-fuel-tank-hazard-in-ford-trucks/?mod=rss_WSJBlog&mod=WSJ_Autos_Driversseat

Wednesday, September 8, 2010

Will consumers partake? by Felipe Faria

The Obama administration is proposing new rules that would label each new passenger vehicle with a letter grade from A to D based on its fuel efficiency and emissions. The measure is part of Obama's plan to promote electric cars and other advanced-technology vehicles.

Regulations of this sort will eventually force companies to adapt to a market that is becoming increasingly concerned with finding alternative fuel options to the highly pollutant and increasingly expensive gasoline.


In the past few years the market for hybrid cars experienced a boom. Consumers seeking these cars were either concerned about the environment or with the price of gasoline, but with gasoline prices relatively stable over the past year sales of SUVs and crossovers rose nearly 21%. The question now is: would the government’s plan to grade cars based on its fuel efficiency and emissions help boost the sales of “greener” cars even with the price of gasoline remaining relatively stable?

New GM CEO is Refreshingly Honest

Oftentimes CEOs are afraid to speak their minds, fearing retribution from shareholders, employees, or the government. GM's new Chief Executive, however, isn't so shy.

Dan Akerson, while speaking to GM employees on Wednesday, mentioned "I vote Republican" and that GM must go into "attack mentality." From the automotive blog Jalopnik:

The comments came during a town hall meeting at GM headquarters in Detroit today, where Akerson and departing CEO Ed Whitacre had a symbolic hand-off. During the discussion, our source says Akerson talked about his education at the London School of Economics, and took a swipe at the Obama administration, saying Washington types could stand some of the training in economics and philosophy that he enjoyed.

Akerson is no closet Republican; the former head of the Carlyle Group's private equity arm gave $2,300 to Sen. John McCain in 2008, along with $28,500 to the Republican National Committee, which has criticized Obama for spending $50 billion to rescue GM.

He also said GM needed to be in "an attack mentality" that's "more fun than playing defense," which would comport with his other schooling at the U.S. Naval Academy.

This is good for GM. Hopefully the new CEO will be more aggressive than past GM CEOs in pursuing new products and integrating new technologies into cars. Upcoming models like the Chevy Volt, Cadillac ATS, and Buick Regal indicate that GM is moving in the right direction. It is refreshing to hear this kind of candor from a CEO, but he should be careful what he says. The government still owns 60.8% of GM common stock, so antagonizing the Obama adminstration may not be the smartest PR tactic.





Geely, The New Name Behind Volvo By Chris Roberts

One of the biggest questions facing the global automotive industry is what to say about China. While the country’s people can’t buy enough foreign cars, China’s domestic auto makers are still in their infancy.

The Wall Street Journal reports in an August 27th article that the sale of Volvo to Chinese auto maker Geely has been successful and Geely is already drawing up plans for its new acquisition. The article reports Geely to be planning several new Volvo factories and research centers in China to lower the cost of production for many Volvo models. However, the article also points to many doubts analysis’s have that Geely can make Volvo successful. Firstly, Geely, or any other Chinese automaker, has never managed a global brand like Volvo. Secondly, Geely, like all other Chinese auto makers, is not known for quality or good design.

I have my own doubts about the Chinese automotive industry and their acquisition of brands like Volvo as well. There is a massive contradiction within what Geely is planning. By moving production of several Volvo models to China for cost of labor reasons, the quality could really suffer. I also doubt the ambiguous plans for creating a Volvo research center in China as Volvo is known for Swedish engineering. It seems Geely’s plan could undermine the Volvo customer base. People buy Volvos because they know they are safe and designed by smart Swedish people. China is hardly known for quality or safety within the American psyche. If word gets out that new Volvos are being designed and built in China, will loyal Volvo customers still come back to the showrooms? I doubt it.

Tuesday, September 7, 2010

The New Maserati GranTurismo Convertible

Recently, Maserati released their new GranTurismo Convertible. This newly designed supercar by Maserati expresses the forefront of the auto industry. Costing over $138,000 its not marketed towards the everyday customers that walk into Lexus, Kia or even Ford showrooms. Although, this car disproportionally represents the car market it represents where the automotive industry is able to head to. Now the car is made in Europe, but is available all throughout the U.S. The sale of the Maserati should concern American auto makers, especially Chevrolet, considering that the sales of they're own version of a high tech European super car, the Corvette Z06, can be affected. The Chevrolet is still the iconic American super car that Steve McQuinn drove in Gone in 60 seconds, but its evolved into a car that is a completely different entity from its original make and model by material and symbolism. Much like the Maserati GranTurism convertible which represents the pinnacle of Italian/European car design and engineering, the Chevrolet Corvette was bright beam showing America's strength and the U.S's incredible advancements in technology and engineering. It was one of the quickest cars in its day and had the style and sexiness of Megan Fox in its day. Going into the present, the corvette is worth half as much as the Maserati GranTurismo convertible even though the Corvette is able to reach speeds of over 200 mph and handle better on the track. The U.S. auto industry, not just Chevrolet, must realize the hard facts that currently European automakers are out competing the U.S. auto companies, even though the European auto makers charge twice and even three times as much. As an everyday consumer, I even see a huge difference in the quality and types of craftsmanship between American and European cars. I feel that industry professionals are too focused on raising the numbers like sales and income so much so that they forget to place the passion and soul into cars which apparently European automakers are doing. The auto industry doesn't need a stimulus, rather it needs a makeover and it needs a good self checkup because until they realize consumers want stylish cars rather than mass marketed and poorly crafted automobiles, they will not be able to increase their sales.

Saturday, September 4, 2010

Patriot or Cheapskate?

The automotive industry has come a long way from Henry Ford's Model T. During the early 20th century GM and Fords were not just the main suppliers of cars and trucks in America, but also throughout the world. Stepping back into reality, America's car companies such as, GM, Ford and Jeep and Chrysler have become fish in the vast automotive ocean. It's not because American cars are made of shoddy materials but its due to globalization and the new competitors that arise everyday. Competition drives not just American automotive companies to develop faster, more efficient and practical automobiles but international companies such as Mercedes, BMW, Fiat, Renault and Vauxhall to develop cars that are even more fuel efficient, appealing, and sleeker. Globalization has made the process of selling American made automobiles to American's an increasingly difficult battle. The war that's waged between American companies and out-of-state companies will continue to persist, and the future will only bring about more difficulties.              
Nevertheless, consumers are in a great situation to buy cars. While companies fight each other for consumer recognition, consumers can choose from a medley of vehicles that are cheaper, faster, more stylish and more practical. So the question is, do consumers patriotically side with America's companies or do they select the best car for their money?

Paul

Morgan Dupp on Globalization

I feel that car companies can expand their markets and sales outside the U.S. Globalization is currently affecting the United States car companies by them being able to expand their sales and their markets outside the rural and urban cities and towns of America. This nation is not the only consumer. China, Taiwan, and even countries like Japan can survive on subsistence such as the sales of cars.

The automotive car companies in the U.S. can use globalization to their advantage. The U.S. car companies are able to expand all their factories and all their workers so that whole entire system becomes an efficient machine. Once this machine begins to fall apart, many things occur to the automotive industry, especially the degradation and the downfall of the industry. Therefore, the industry must keep on growing.

-- Morgan Dupp

Friday, September 3, 2010

EPA Regulations and the Future of the American Auto Industry

According to a recent Wall St. Journal Report, the US Environmental Protection Agency is considering new ways of measuring vehicle fuel efficiency and environmental impact.  The new labeling system would assign vehicles a letter grade based on MPG and grams of CO2 per miles driven.  From August 31sts WSJ:

While the current labels are fairly packed with information about fuel consumption, costs and environmental impact, they were designed for traditional gasoline-powered vehicles. Now that battery-powered electric cars and plug-in hybrids are getting ready to come to market, consumers are seeking additional information tailored to make it easier to compare vehicles across a variety of power systems.

One proposed sticker looks a lot like the current ones, but with more emphasis on average fuel economy and annual fuel cost. Another gives vehicles prominently displayed letter grades from A through D based on their environmental footprints. The new sticker designs are only proposals, and the agencies are asking for public feedback to help them decide on a final design.

“We are asking the American people to tell us what they need to make the best economic and environmental decisions when buying a new car,” said EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson. “New fuel economy labels will keep pace with the new generation of fuel efficient cars and trucks rolling off the line, and provide simple, straightforward updates to inform consumers about their choices in a rapidly changing market.”

This change could disproportionately effect affect US auto companies, do to their reliance on truck and SUV sales and the perception of worse fuel economy from US brands.  However, it should be pointed out that GM is launching the Chevy Volt soon and Ford sells a number of hybrids, including the excellent Ford Fusion Hybrid. 


This also relates to globalization.  US brands are beginning to import cars they typically sold in Europe and Asia.  The Ford Transit Connect, for example, is a small van that appeals to small businesses who want van-like mobility without van-like fuel economy.  GM is bringing the Chevy Spark here, a so-called "micro car."  Chrysler, now owned by Italy's Fiat, will begin importing one of Fiats tiny cars as well. 

Josh Kaib

Thursday, September 2, 2010

The Future for American Automakers. By Felipe Faria

The automotive industry of nowadays is going through a period of transformation and adjustment. As companies recover from the financial crisis, it is imperative that they adapt to a changing market that constantly demands innovations and environmentally conscious practices from automakers.
American automakers, usually used to manufacturing SUVs and trucks are being forced to diversify and start producing small, fuel-efficient cars. As demand for cars rapidly increases in Asia, American automakers are already taking steps to take advantage of the opportunity. According to the Wall Street Journal, Ford expects 70% of its global growth this decade to come from emerging Asia-Pacific and Africa markets, with China and India among the biggest contributors. 
Ironically, American automakers expected to expand abroad face challenges at home, where Asian manufactures such as Hyundai and Kia have been constantly gaining market share.

Stalling? By Chris Roberts

Today is a very interesting day to create a blog about the automotive industry. August sales for the entire industry fell 21% from a year ago, reports The Wall Street Journal. The month also marks the first time General Motors reported a drop in their sales for the last 10 months, also reported by The Wall Street Journal.


However, the article, found in today’s Wall Street Journal, does not paint a grim picture. Many analysts and corporate spokesman quoted argued that the news is not all bad. They cited artificial numbers from a year ago when the “cash for clunkers” program was in full affect and the aging vehicles Americans will have to replace soon regardless of the economy.

I seem to agree with the analysts’ sentiments and look forward to a growing automotive industry in the US and abroad. I expect sales to recover and be up for a number of reasons, most notably the introduction of new 2011 and 2012 models. I personally believe in the phrase, “If you build it, they will come” from Field of Dreams when thinking about the auto industry. Last year, when the auto industry was on its knees and American auto makers were requesting bailouts, Subaru was the only company with good sales numbers as reported by LeftLaneNews.com. The reason for their success was speculated to stem from the new models they introduced. I believe this same affect will be seen in the future when other automakers introduce new vehicles with better quality and mileage standards.

This theory would also explain why Ford did not have as bad of numbers as other automakers as reported by The Wall Street Journal. Ford is only down by 11% from a year ago and I believe it is no coincidence that they have one of the newest model lineups.

New models such as the new 2011 Chevy Cruze, 2012 Chevy Malibu, 2011 Jeep Grand Cherokee and 2011 Ford Explorer will help boost interest just as some Americans can no longer wait for a better economy to buy a car.