2014 Ford Escape Se on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Car and Driver shows off awesome 1960s ads

Someone must have recently rediscovered the keys to the archives at Car and Driver, and the access has been put to good use. Following last month's fantastic look at automotive ads from the '50s, there's now a new gallery running from March 1960 through December 1969. This collection provides a great overview of a decade full of iconic cars. If you're a fan of Carroll Shelby, particularly his Mustangs, then there's a lot to love among this group. One ad from July 1965 aimed to sell the GT350, but with an ocean of text and a tiny picture, it probably could've used a once-over by Don Draper's team. By December '65, the copywriters ironed out the problems with a spot proclaiming boldly "Shelby GT350 is 'Son of Cobra.'" The company offered some great accessories, too. For those into European motoring, there's a humorous attempt to sell the Alfa Romeo Giulia as both a racecar and family hauler. Toyota also boasts about the winning record for the 2000GT. Among the best text comes from BMW for lines like: "What's BMW got? The most advanced high-performance engine in any production car, for a cruising speed of 100 mph." Of course, Volkswagen's famous "Lemon" ad for the Beetle also gets its due here. Separately, each of these ads is fascinating, but taken together they tell the story of a great decade of motoring. Go give them all a read at Car and Driver. Related Video: News Source: Car and DriverImage Credit: GM Heritage Center Marketing/Advertising Read This Alfa Romeo BMW Ford Toyota Volkswagen shelby alfa romeo giulia shelby gt350 toyota 2000gt

Ford reports 58% drop in Q2 profits on European losses

Ford Motor Company announced Wednesday that it has posted a $1 billion profit for the second quarter of 2012. That sounds like good news for the Blue Oval, until you take into account that Ford posted a $2.4 billion profit for Q2 a year ago. That is a substantial 58 percent loss.
Ford also posted $465 million in international losses, with $404 million of those losses coming directly from Europe. The automaker also increased its European loss projections to $1 billion for 2012, due in large part to the economic crisis overseas, which has resulted in increased unemployment and decreased consumer confidence.

Ford fights back against patent trolls

Some people are just awful. Some organizations are just as awful. And when those people join those organizations, we get stories like this one, where Ford has spent the past several years combatting so-called patent trolls. According to Automotive News, these malicious organizations have filed over a dozen lawsuits against the company since 2012. They work by purchasing patents, only to later accuse companies of misusing intellectual property, despite the fact that the so-called patent assertion companies never actually, you know, do anything with said intellectual property. AN reports that both Hyundai and Toyota have been victimized by these companies, with the former forced to pay $11.5 million to a company called Clear With Computers. Toyota, meanwhile, settled with Paice LLC, over its hybrid tech. The world's largest automaker agreed to pay $5 million, on top of $98 for every hybrid it sold (if the terms of the deal included each of the roughly 1.5 million hybrids Toyota sold since 2000, the company would have owed $147 million). Including the previous couple of examples, AN reports 107 suits were filed against automakers last year alone. But Ford is taking action to prevent further troubles... kind of. The company has signed on with a firm called RPX, in what sounds strangely like a protection racket. Automakers like Ford pay RPX around $1.5 million each year for access to its catalog of patents, which it spent nearly $1 billion building. "We take the protection and licensing of patented innovations very seriously," Ford told AN via email. "And as many smart businesses are doing, we are taking proactive steps to protect against those seeking patent infringement litigation." What are your thoughts on this? Should this patent business be better managed? Is it reasonable that companies purchase patents only to file suit against the companies that build actual products? Have your say in Comments.