2005 Chrysler Pacifica Base Sport Utility 4-door 3.5l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Weekly Recap: Obama reflects on the auto bailout's legacy

President Obama took a victory lap of sorts this week at the Detroit Auto Show, lauding the industry's progress and reflecting on the decision to bail out General Motors and Chrysler seven years ago. While the rescue was controversial at the time, historians will likely judge the president's actions to help save two of America's industrial symbols in a positive light. Much like Theodore Roosevelt's trust-busting tactics were controversial in the early 20th century, Obama's plan drew fire from critics who argued the free market should be left to its own devices. But providing financial aid and forcing the automakers to restructure had an enduring impact on the US economy. The auto industry has added more than 646,000 jobs since the companies emerged from bankruptcy, including manufacturing and retail positions. Make no mistake, GM and Chrysler were nearly dead in 2009. Now, GM is a powerhouse that's set to capitalize on a market that could see 18 million vehicles sold this year. Chrysler, which was renamed FCA US, survived as part of the Italian-American Fiat Chrysler Automobiles conglomerate. It's also performed well amid the strong industry conditions, though CEO Sergio Marchionne very publicly went looking for alliance partners last year, something from which he's since backed off. While Obama can claim a win, the bailout was actually started by George W. Bush, who provided short-term loans to GM and Chrysler in December 2008. Without that, they might not have made it much past Obama's inauguration. NEWS & ANALYSIS News: Spy Shooters captured the next-gen BMW Z4 during extreme cold weather testing. Analysis: The upcoming Z4 (which might be called the Z5) looks sharp. But the big deal is that BMW's much-anticipated sports-car project with Toyota is coming to fruition. Refresher: BMW and Toyota agreed to work together back in December 2011 and then announced an expansion of that deal to include sports cars in June 2012. Ultimately, it will provide BMW with a new Z4 and Toyota with another sports car, perhaps the Supra replacement. BMW is developing the platform, while Toyota is expected to chip in with hybrid technology. Big picture, this project is a good thing. It's providing enthusiasts with two modern sports cars that Toyota and BMW might not chose to develop on their own. This template has been shown to work, as the Fiat-Mazda alliance produced the MX-5 Miata and 124 Spider. News: The Jeep Grand Cherokee Hellcat was also spied, briefly.

Buy Ford and GM stock and make 5%

Want to make a five-percent return when 10-year treasuries are paying around two percent? Ford (F) and General Motors (GM) have solid balance sheets, strong cash flow, solid earnings, and growing markets. By all accounts, they are smart investments. But the market is down on these stocks. Why? Some of the stupid excuses include: They are cyclical companies The Detroit 3 have lost 3.5 million in sales since 2000 The world economy is shaky GM recently filed for bankruptcy Their markets have peaked They haven't changed their ways Let's take these criticisms one by one: They Are Cyclical Companies Yes, they are cyclical. Every company is cyclical. Every industry is cyclical. Some more than others, but not every company is immune from swings in the market. Banks used to be 'non-cyclical' leader, not anymore. Airline stocks are just as cyclical as auto stocks, yet they are trading at multiples greater than the auto industry. Why? And what accounts for the irrational stock price for Tesla (TSLA)? At least Ford (F) and General Motors (GM) make money and have positive cash flows. In fact, both companies have a net positive cash position. They have more cash on hand than liabilities. Auto sales in the United States hit a record 17.5 million vehicles in 2015. During the Great Recession, Ford (F) and General Motors (GM) cut their break even points to 10 million vehicles per year. Anything above an annual U.S. volume of 10 million vehicles is profit. And what a profit they make. Sales of Ford's F-150 continues to be the best-selling vehicle in the United States for over 30 years. Detroit 3 Have Lost 3.5 million in Sales Since 2000 Automotive News reports General Motors (GM), Ford (F) and Chrysler (FCA) have lost a combined 3.5 million vehicles sales since 2000. So how can they be making more money? Two big reasons – Fleet Sales and the UAW. Fleet Sales The Detroit 3 used to own car rental companies to keep their factories running. Ford owned Hertz (HTZ), General Motors owned all of National Car Rental and 29 percent of Avis, and Chrysler, the forerunner to Fiat Chrysler (FCA), used to own Thrifty Car Rental and Dollar Rent-A-Car. The Detroit 3 owned these rental companies to have a place to sell their bad product and keep their factories running. These were low margin sales, and in many cases, were money losers for the Detroit 3. They no longer own auto rental companies.

Automakers not currently promoting EVs are probably doomed

Okay, let's be honest. The sky isn't falling – gas prices are. In fact, some experts say that prices at the pump will remain depressed for the next decade. Consumers have flocked to SUVs and CUVs, reversing the upward trend in US fuel economy seen over the last several years. A sudden push into electric vehicles seems ridiculous when gas guzzlers are selling so well. Make hay while the sun shines, right? A quick glance at some facts and figures provides evidence that the automakers currently doubling down on internal combustion probably have some rocky years ahead of them. Fiat Chrysler Automobiles is a prime example of a volume manufacturer devoted to incremental gains for existing powertrains. Though FCA will kill off some of its more fuel-efficient models, part of its business plan involves replacing four- and five-speed transmissions with eight- and nine-speed units, yielding a fuel efficiency boost in the vicinity of ten percent over the next few years. Recent developments by battery startups have led some to suggest that efficiency and capacity could increase by over 100 percent in the same time. Research and development budgets paint a grim picture for old guard companies like Fiat Chrysler: In 2014, FCA spent about $1,026 per car sold on R&D, compared with about $24,783 per car sold for Tesla. To be fair, FCA can't be expected to match Tesla's efforts when its entry-level cars list for little more than half that much. But even more so than R&D, the area in which newcomers like Tesla have the industry licked is infrastructure. We often forget that our vehicles are mostly useless metal boxes without access to the network of fueling stations that keep them rolling. While EVs can always be plugged in at home, their proliferation depends on a similar network of charging stations that can allow for prolonged travel. Tesla already has 597 of its 480-volt Superchargers installed worldwide, and that figure will continue to rise. Porsche has also proposed a new 800-volt "Turbo Charging Station" to support the production version of its Mission E concept, and perhaps other VW Auto Group vehicles. As EVs grow in popularity, investment in these proprietary networks will pay off — who would buy a Chevy if the gas stations served only Ford owners? If anyone missed the importance of infrastructure, it's Toyota.