2012 Hyundai 2.0t on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Hyundai reveals CEO's pay for first time ever

Thanks to some government pressure, Hyundai's billionaire chairman, Chung Mong Koo, has revealed just how much he gets paid each year. Honestly, the amount is a bit lower than we'd expect considering he helms such a huge industrial empire. The 76-year-old chairman brought home $13 million in 2013, $5.2 million of which came from Hyundai's automotive business while both Mobis and Hyundai Steel chipped in $3.94 million, each. For reference, Ford CEO Alan Mulally netted $23.2 million in 2013, although the vast majority of that money came from stock options.
The push for Chung to reveal his pay was part of a larger effort by the South Korean government called the Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act. The act forces several thousand companies to release info on annual pay, bonuses and severance for employees earning over $5 million won ($469,000), according to Bloomberg.
"With the disclosure of the executives' compensation, the pressure to deliver better profits will increase," said Heo Pil Seok, the CEO of Midas International Asset Management. It seems to be working, as Hyundai shareholders, of which Midas is one, have seen their shares increase by 6.1 percent in 2014, which includes a 1.2-percent jump as of yesterday, according to Bloomberg.

40+ cars that barely avoid the gas guzzler tax

The Gas Guzzler schedule, with mpg ratings and charges that haven't changed since 1991, lays out which fuel-swillers owe what to Uncle Sam.
I started thinking about the "Gas Guzzler Tax" - considerably less well known as The Energy Tax Act of 1978 - when I was driving Dodge's new Challenger SRT Hellcat last week. Unsurprisingly for a car that can burn 1.5 gallons of gas per minute at max tilt, theoretically able to empty a full tank of premium in about 13 minutes, the Hellcat will be subject to the Gas Guzzler Tax schedule when it goes on sale.

What do J.D. Power's quality ratings really measure?

Check these recently released J.D. Power Initial Quality Study (IQS) results. Do they raise any questions in your mind? Premium sports-car maker Porsche sits in first place for the third straight year, so are Porsches really the best-built cars in the U.S. market? Korean brands Kia and Hyundai are second and fourth, so are Korean vehicles suddenly better than their US, European, and Japanese competitors? Are workaday Chevrolets (seventh place) better than premium Buicks (11th), and Buicks better than luxury Cadillacs (21st), even though all are assembled in General Motors plants with the same processes and many shared parts? Are Japanese Acuras (26th) worse than German Volkswagens (24th)? And is "quality" really what it used to be (and what most perceive it to be), a measure of build excellence? Or has it evolved into much more a measure of likeability and ease of use? To properly analyze these widely watched results, we must first understand what IQS actually studies, and what the numerical scores really mean. First, as its name indicates, it's all about "initial" quality, measured by problems reported by new-vehicle owners in their first 90 days of ownership. If something breaks or falls off four months in, it doesn't count here. Second, the scores are problems per 100 vehicles, or PP100. So Power's 2015 IQS industry average of 112 PP100 translates to just 1.12 reported problems per vehicle. Third, no attempt is made to differentiate BIG problems from minor ones. Thus a transmission or engine failure counts the same as a squeaky glove box door, tricky phone pairing, inconsistent voice recognition, or anything else that annoys the owner. Traditionally, a high-quality vehicle is one that is well-bolted together. It doesn't leak, squeak, rattle, shed parts, show gaps between panels, or break down and leave you stranded. By this standard, there are very few poor-quality new vehicles in today's U.S. market. But what "quality" should not mean, is subjective likeability: ease of operation of the radio, climate controls, or seat adjusters, phone pairing, music downloading, sizes of touch pads on an infotainment screen, quickness of system response, or accuracy of voice-recognition. These are ergonomic "human factors" issues, not "quality" problems. Yet these kinds of pleasability issues are now dominating today's JDP "quality" ratings.