c
compose new post
j
next post/next comment
k
previous post/previous comment
r
reply
e
edit
o
show/hide comments
t
go to top
esc
cancel

Updates from May, 2012

  • CD players could become the next victim of the struggle to shed pounds from cars in the name of fuel efficiency.

    In an interview with the Detroit Free Press, Ford designer Michael Arbaugh said he was “looking forward to the day” when designers ditch CD players on dashboards forever.

    The reason is simple — CD players weigh 2.2 kilograms, even more when you factor in the CDs carried — and that’s valuable weight which has a direct impact on the fuel efficiency of modern cars.

    A year ago, that may not have mattered so much, but in a world where high gas prices have become the norm and the environmental agenda is more prominent than ever, automakers are getting into the details to shed the pounds. They’re also aware that CDs are becoming a device of the past.

    “I think anybody under 30 is probably using all MP3 devices. They don’t buy CDs,” Arbaugh said.

    That consideration is likely to accelerate automakers’ moves to remove physical media players from their cars, meaning we could witness the death of the CD drive far faster than we saw the death of the tape player.

    Last year, Ford dropped multi-disk CD players from its European Ford Focus line, noting that 95% of the model’s buyers chose versions with MP3 device connection and 90% chose a Bluetooth wireless connection.

    The Chevrolet Sonic RS also ditched an optical drive in favour of MyLink, which allows access to MP3 players and the streaming of music from sites such as Pandora.

    Earlier this year, research company Stratacom predicted that about 331,000 cars will be sold without CD players in the United States this year,  jumping to 12.1-million by 2018.


    1:00 pm on May 16, 2012
     
  • DETROIT — Auto suppliers’ relations with Toyota and Honda have soured to the worst level in 11 years, but U.S. automakers have won more trust, a survey showed.

    The two largest Japanese automakers managed to retain the top two slots, respectively, in an annual survey of suppliers about their rapport with automakers that make cars and trucks in North America.

    But their scores fell to the lowest point since the study introduced its “working relations” index in 2002. General Motors and Chrysler continued to occupy the bottom two slots, but they achieved their highest marks yet.

    The narrowing gap suggests that the six major automakers in the United States are “converging toward mediocrity,” said John Henke, president of Planning Perspectives Inc., which conducted the survey released on Monday.

    Salespeople from 439 major suppliers were polled in late March and early April. There were 564 respondents.

    About 70% of the parts in a car are provided by suppliers, which make everything from seats to screws to sensors. Having good relationships with the supply base can help automakers build better vehicles more efficiently.

    Ford and Nissan held their spots at No. 3 and No. 4, respectively.

    From 2004 to 2008, Toyota and Honda earned high marks from suppliers because of their willingness to work with companies to lower costs. During that period, the three U.S. automakers adopted a more combative approach, which cost them in the rankings.

    But during the recession, Toyota and Honda offered buyouts for employees, leaving them with a less-experienced workforce, Henke said. The supply crunch triggered by the tsunami in Japan last year exacerbated the problem.

    “The buyers, the folks who have the day-to-day responsibilities, just aren’t doing the right thing,” he said. “We’ve had suppliers tell us in a couple cases that they don’t know the Toyota Way. That’s creating some problems for them.”

    At the same time, Chrysler and GM have adopted a more collaborative approach. The gap between top-rated Toyota and Chrysler, which was ranked last, shrank to 48 points in 2012 from 106 points in 2011.

    Automakers with scores above 350 are considered to have a “good” or “very good” relationships with the supply base — much like an “A” grade. A mark below 250 signals “poor” or “very poor” relations. Between those two points is “adequate.”

    Suppliers are more willing to offer discounts and invest in new technology for their favoured customers. They give fewer concessions to automakers that are intractable and unfair negotiators or make last-minute engineering changes that can hurt a supplier’s bottom line.

    For the fourth straight year, not one of the six automakers in the survey showcased a good relationship with the supply sector. It is possible for Toyota and Honda to recover their lost ground within four years, Henke said.

    It can be difficult to restore trust with suppliers, but not impossible. Ford, which ranked last in 2007, jumped to the third spot in 2010 at a time when the entire company was restructuring. It has been in the No. 3 spot ever since.

    GM and Chrysler, the two U.S. automakers that took federal bailouts three years ago, have languished at the bottom of the list since 2008, but have both made strides.

    Under former purchasing chief Dan Knott, Chrysler made the biggest improvement of any other automaker on the list in the last three years. In 2010, 71% of suppliers described their relations with Chrysler as poor. By 2012, that shrank to 46%, on par with Ford.

    Henke projected that GM and Chrysler could continue to improve their rankings over the next three to four years, but only if the Detroit automakers do not slip back into their old ways as some suppliers have noted.

    “A couple of them said, ‘We helped them out when things were bad; they seem to have forgotten that,’” Henke said.

    © Thomson Reuters 2012


    11:06 am on May 14, 2012
     
  • It’s not often that I am totally out of my element on four wheels, but Ford’s Raptorized version of the iconic F-150 is about as far away from the Booth psyche as it’s possible to get and still use fossil fuels. Jacked-up off-road pickups have always figured somewhere between Oprah Winfrey interviews and emergency dental surgery on my to-do list. In other words, driving this particular truck was alien; I might as well have donned a spacesuit.

    But my associate and resident truck guy, Howard J. Elmer, raved about it and it does have an SVT (as in Special Vehicle Team, the guys who massage Mustangs) 6.2-litre V8 under the hood. Surely I could stand with some expansion of my horizons.

    And expansion — or, more accurately, expanse — is what I got! The first, second and lasting impression, for this effete, motorcycle-testing, BMW-loving auto dandy was of the immense size of the beast. I suspect I would gain some measure of familiarity with its girth in long-term ownership, but in my short, week-long association, I never really came to grips with its sheer enormity. This F-150’s dinosaur-like outer dimensions (Hey, Ford named it the Raptor, not I) determined where I felt comfortable driving, the space I afforded other almost assuredly intimidated motorists and especially where I parked. Indeed, parking became a major issue.

    Downtown parking lots are simply not designed for 5,888-millimetre SuperCabs that feel like they’re riding on stilts. All you muy macho Garth Brooks fans can scoff all you like, but parking this requires the skills of a tugboat captain and the precision of an orthoscopic surgeon. The only reason there’s not a rash of scratched and dented Nissan Sentras downtown is that discretion became the better part of valour and I simply refused to park — at least legally — anywhere that I had to squeeze between two cars, my theory being that few tow trucks are equipped to haul anything so massive from its ill-gotten parking spot.

    Another lasting impression was of height. One definitely climbs into the Raptor. Indeed, I suspect my elderly parents would need either a ladder or one of those portable lifts to gain access to the cabin. Those flashy running boards are not an option, folks, because climbing into the Raptor is really a great alternative to the one-legged squats my chiropractor swears is a great workout for my recalcitrant gluteus maximus muscles (yes, my ass) that he says are the cause of all my back woes.

    But, once ensconced in said skyscraper, there’s another surprise: The Raptor is sensationally — at least for a pickup — equipped. There are acres of leather, an excellent stereo, seat heaters and all manner of so-called luxury items. Who knew that all those weekend rednecks were closet hedonists. See? There’s common ground.

    The other noticeable attribute is that King Kong of a motor. Yes, it’s a big old American V8 (albeit one with its camshafts above its cylinder heads but just two valves in each cylinder), but it actually feels quite sophisticated. Years of development and some very smart engine management software have at least somewhat civilized the beast. The exception to all that civility is, of course, the throaty exhaust music that, true to the spirit of the Raptor being a legitimate off-road racer, sounds a little like a barking NASCAR, albeit one dressed up in its best black tie and muffler. It’s an impressive powertrain.

    And I am sure that, given its head on appropriate terrain — that would be some place with bumps and mud, methinks — it’s probably the very state of the art. To be sure, it’s accoutred with all manner of topflight aftermarket goodies — 35-inch BFGoodrich All-Terrain TA/KO 315/70-17 tires, Fox shocks, custom springs, struts and prop shafts that look robust enough for a monster truck — that would make smooth the roughest of trail and send the deer and antelope scurrying. Elmer, our resident mud monkey, says it all adds up to 286 millimetres of suspension travel in the front and a whopping 307 mm in the rear. He says this is a good thing; I choose to believe him.

    Of course, I used none of it. The one pronouncement I can make to anyone buying a Raptor is that he or she should use it for its intended purpose, namely, sending Sierra Club backpackers and lost Prius owners (possibly the same thing?) scurrying for cover. If you’re thinking of buying a Raptor because it’s a cool-looking truck that will get you noticed, you should be made aware that there are equally attention-garnering blingy cars that don’t exact quite the same penalty. That said, however, I must say that the Raptor was more civil than I thought it would be, if only because I was expecting a buckboard chariot with precious little charm and even less civility.

    What I got was a surprisingly capable, albeit very niched, rendition of Ford’s ubiquitous F-150. The secret to Raptor ownership then, as with all such specialty vehicles, is one of managing expectations. If you really plan to go bounding over hill and dale, then the Raptor is as sophisticated a machine available (save perhaps a Range Rover) that is off-road proficient. On the other hand, wannabes will find it more punishing than a bed of nails. I suspect that true afficionados would have it no other way.

    THE SPECS

    Type of vehicle All-wheel-drive full-sized pickup
    Engine 6.2L SOHC V8
    Power 411 hp @ 5,500 rpm; 434 lb-ft of torque @ 4,500 rpm
    Transmission Six-speed manumatic
    Brakes Four-wheel disc with ABS
    Tires All-Terrain TA/KO 315/70-17
    Price: base/as tested $55,999/$64,079
    Destination charge $1,500
    Trasport Canada fuel economy L/100 km 19.1 city, 14.2 hwy.
    Standard features Power door locks, windows and mirrors, front and rear air conditioning with micron air filter, AM/FM/six-disc CD player, Sirius satellite radio, steering wheel-mounted audio controls, wireless phone connectivity, cruise control, information display, tilt steering wheel, cloth/leather seats, power front seats, heated front seats, auto headlights, dual front air bags, dual side air bags, AdvanceTrac with RSC (Roll Stability Control), trailer sway control, safety canopy system, SecuriLock passive anti-theft system, tire pressure monitoring system, SOS post-crash alert system, MyKey programmable vehicle key


    1:00 pm on May 11, 2012
     
  • Detroit • Ford will shorten its “summer shutdown” at 13 plants in North America to allow it to make nearly 40,000 more vehicles as the No. 2 U.S. automaker strives to meet demand.

    The factories will be idled for one week instead of the usual two weeks. Automakers typically use this time to make engineering and design changes at factories for upcoming models.

    Ford said last month that it would lose U.S. market share this year as consumer demand for cars and trucks is outstripping the automaker’s capacity to build them.

    Most of Ford’s North American plants are at maximum capacity. Ford is adding production shifts this month at three assembly plants that are not at maximum capacity.

    “Requiring more capacity from our plants is a good problem to have and having the flexibility to add a week of production in our plants goes a long way toward solving it,” Jim Tetreault, vice president of North America Manufacturing, said in a statement.

    Last week, Chrysler, the No. 3 U.S. automaker, said four of its North American assembly plants would forego the normal two-week summer shutdown this year due to improved demand.

    The No. 1 U.S. automaker, General Motors, declined to comment on its production schedule.

    Six Ford assembly plants will be closed for one week this summer, including Chicago Assembly Plant, Dearborn Truck Plant and Michigan Assembly Plant. The other plants include Dearborn Engine and Chicago Stamping.

    © Thomson Reuters 2012


    8:00 am on May 9, 2012
     
  • DETROIT — Ford will shorten its “summer shutdown” at 13 plants in North America to allow it to make nearly 40,000 more vehicles as the No. 2 U.S. automaker strives to meet demand.

    The factories will be idled for one week instead of the usual two weeks. Automakers typically use this time to make engineering and design changes at factories for upcoming models.

    Ford said last month that it would lose U.S. market share this year as consumer demand for cars and trucks is outstripping the automaker’s capacity to build them.

    Most of Ford’s North American plants are at maximum capacity. Ford is adding production shifts this month at three assembly plants that are not at maximum capacity.

    “Requiring more capacity from our plants is a good problem to have and having the flexibility to add a week of production in our plants goes a long way toward solving it,” Jim Tetreault, vice president of North America Manufacturing, said in a statement.

    Last week, Chrysler, the No. 3 U.S. automaker, said four of its North American assembly plants would forego the normal two-week summer shutdown this year due to improved demand.

    The No. 1 U.S. automaker, General Motors, declined to comment on its production schedule.

    Six Ford assembly plants will be closed for one week this summer, including Chicago Assembly Plant, Dearborn Truck Plant and Michigan Assembly Plant. The other plants include Dearborn Engine and Chicago Stamping.

    © Thomson Reuters 2012


    8:00 am on May 9, 2012
     
  • Detroit • Ford will shorten its “summer shutdown” at 13 plants in North America to allow it to make nearly 40,000 more vehicles as the No. 2 U.S. automaker strives to meet demand.

    The factories will be idled for one week instead of the usual two weeks. Automakers typically use this time to make engineering and design changes at factories for upcoming models.

    Ford said last month that it would lose U.S. market share this year as consumer demand for cars and trucks is outstripping the automaker’s capacity to build them.

    Most of Ford’s North American plants are at maximum capacity. Ford is adding production shifts this month at three assembly plants that are not at maximum capacity.

    “Requiring more capacity from our plants is a good problem to have and having the flexibility to add a week of production in our plants goes a long way toward solving it,” Jim Tetreault, vice president of North America Manufacturing, said in a statement.

    Last week, Chrysler, the No. 3 U.S. automaker, said four of its North American assembly plants would forego the normal two-week summer shutdown this year due to improved demand.

    The No. 1 U.S. automaker, General Motors, declined to comment on its production schedule.

    Six Ford assembly plants will be closed for one week this summer, including Chicago Assembly Plant, Dearborn Truck Plant and Michigan Assembly Plant. The other plants include Dearborn Engine and Chicago Stamping.

    © Thomson Reuters 2012


    8:00 am on May 9, 2012
     
  • Seven automakers, including General Motors and Ford, have agreed to adopt a fast-charging system that can charge electric vehicles and plug-in hybrids in as little as 15 minutes.

    The group’s goal is to make charging an electric car as simple as filling a gas tank. Chrysler is the latest automaker to join the consortium, which also includes members from Volkswagen and its luxury Audi brand, Daimler, Porsche and BMW.

    The ability to quickly charge cars like GM’s Chevrolet Volt and Ford’s Focus Electric is crucial to making them more popular among consumers, said Mike Tinskey, associate director of vehicle electrification for Ford, the No. 2 U.S. automaker.

    The charging method championed by Ford and others in the group will be showcased at a electric vehicle conference in Los Angeles this week.

    But the approach supported by Ford and others is not compatible with the technology already used by Japanese automakers. Nissan’s Leaf electric car uses the “CHAdeMO” system to quickly charge, for example.

    The lack of consensus has slowed the construction of fast charging stations in the U.S. market and illustrates some of the struggles facing the burgeoning electric car industry.

    Ford says its system will be used in its vehicles beyond 2020, Tinskey said. ACEA, a trade group of European automakers, will use the charging system for all new vehicle types in Europe beginning in 2017.

    “We think this is a very long-term solution,” Tinskey said.

    Charging stations equipped with fast charging capability are projected to be available later this year. These stations can cost anywhere from $24,840 to $89,415 depending on how much power is available in a particular area, Tinskey said.


    8:00 am on May 8, 2012
     
  • Sanand, India • The first sight of India’s newest “Motor City” is a collection of giant blue-and-grey structures, windowless boxes in corporate colours that are the hallmark of modern manufacturing.

    The warehouses and machining plants, walled in on an enormous site of more than 400 hectares, are owned by Tata Motors, which moved to the western state of Gujarat in 2008 to start producing its Nano small car.

    A short distance up the road in Sanand, an hour’s drive from the state’s biggest city, Ahmedabad, teams of labourers, drilling rigs and trucks are preparing the foundations for a new $1-billion Ford facility.

    Rising from the dust opposite fields of swaying wheat is a new global car manufacturing hub, the sort of industrial project that politicians in India often talk about creating but have seldom delivered.

    Michael Boneham, an Australian who heads Ford in India, lists the reasons for investing in Gujarat and in the process highlights some of the failings of other states.
    The easy availability of land was “critical” — Ford did not want to risk the sort of protests that have blighted industrial projects elsewhere — and he has nothing but praise for the local government.

    “I’d call them business-like. We’ve set up a two-weekly and now monthly meeting with key project leaders,” the India managing director said during a recent visit to the site.

    “There are assignments, timings  and there are commitments that are met, which is what impresses me. The government also has transparency, which is important for us, and accessibility.”

    Reliable power supplies, decent infrastructure and ports by Indian standards and the availability of educated labour were the other factors that tipped the decision on where to locate Ford’s second Indian plant, which will open in 2014.

    Accompanying the Detroit-based group will be 19 automotive suppliers who are set to build factories and train workers, in the process creating the sort of corporate ecosystem that looks set to attract other manufacturers.

    Farther up the road, French car manufacturer Peugeot has chosen a plot of land for its first factory in India — a proposed $850-million investment — but its plans are on hold due to the debt crisis in the eurozone.

    Maruti Suzuki, India’s biggest car manufacturer, is pressing ahead with a factory elsewhere in Gujarat — in Mehsana, close to the Mundra port — while the motorcycle group Hero has also picked the state for its fourth factory. “Power was a big consideration [in choosing Gujarat],” Shinzo Nakanishi, Maruti Suzuki chief executive, said in an interview at the India auto show earlier this year.

    “Other than Gujarat, states have a problem of power supply,” he added. “Also, the quality of the manpower is good … and it was close to the port, our own port.”

    Maruti’s operations have traditionally been focused in northern Haryana state, while the other main Indian car-making hub is in southern Tamil Nadu where Ford, Hyundai, Renault-Nissan and Michelin already have factories.

    The arrival of global car manufacturers has been a boon for Gujarat’s ambitious chief minister, Narendra Modi, a right-wing Hindu nationalist who holds a much-hyped annual “Vibrant Gujarat” summit to attract investors.

    His record as a no-nonsense business-friendly leader is expected to be part of his eventual pitch to become prime minister — a task made difficult by his association with religious riots in 2002 that left more than 2,000 dead.

    Gujarat will soon have Asia’s biggest solar park and a state-sponsored scheme to build a banking and finance hub with more office space than the financial districts of Paris, Tokyo, London and Shanghai is underway.

    Economic growth in Gujarat has outpaced India’s as a whole over the past decade, hitting 10.5% in 2010-2011 compared with 8.4% for the country, official figures show.
    Critics say Modi’s achievements during his 11-year rule are not what they seem, however, relying too heavily on undisclosed and overgenerous inducements to attract companies.

    The Caravan current affairs magazine reported in March that Tata will retain the money it owes in taxes from its factory and only start paying it back after 20 years — at an interest rate of 0.1%.

    But if the chief minister’s economic record and methods remain contentious, few doubt his vision.

    An estimated two thirds of India’s vast 1.2 billion population continue to scratch out an existence on small family farms.

    Creating a thriving manufacturing sector is vital if the country is to raise incomes and offer job opportunities to its increasingly numerous and young workforce whose aspirations are changing, economists and government planners say.

    “We need to create eight to 10 million jobs every year over the next decade to absorb the expected growth in the labour force,” Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh reminded delegates at a recent emerging markets summit.

    On the other side of the road that leads to the Sanand motor hub lies a vision of traditional India: fields where men and women, skins creased by a lifetime of toil under the baking sun, cut the harvest by hand.

    Babubhai Patel, who estimates his age at about 50, owns a parcel of farm land just on the edge of the new industrial park. As an illiterate farmer, he has little prospect of a job in the factories and he blames the construction work for water shortages over the last four months. His 19-year-old son Mahindra, who has just completed school, is more enthusiastic. “I’d prefer to work in the factory,” he says.


    1:00 pm on May 7, 2012
     
  • BEIJING • Ford, seeking to tap into China’s growing appetite for brawny sport-utility vehicles, will quadruple its offerings in that segment over the next year.

    The U.S. automaker, a late-comer in the world’s largest automotive market, will add the Kuga — the Chinese version of the Escape — and EcoSport small SUVs, and the larger Explorer to its sparse China SUV portfolio, Ford Asia chief Joe Hinrichs said on Sunday.

    Ford currently sells only the Edge in China, leaving it under-represented in a category that offers higher profit margins for automakers.

    “The next phase of our product portfolio growth really is the three SUVs, and it’s so important to China because of the SUV segmentation growth we’re seeing,” he says. He declined to identify when each of the SUVs will go on sale in China.

    Ford, which makes the Fiesta, Focus, Mondeo and other vehicles in China in a three-way tie-up with Chongqing Changan Automobile and Japan’s Mazda, is joining a growing number of automakers pushing out SUVs to meet the rising demand for the vehicles. The rollout is part of Ford’s plan to introduce 15 new vehicles into China by 2015.

    Chinese consumers bought 2.1 million SUVs last year, an increase of 25% and representing almost 12% of total light vehicle sales, according to J.D. Power and LMC Automotive. That total is about half the 4.1 million SUVs sold in the United States, where such vehicles make up almost one third of the market.

    Buyers and industry officials have said the desire of drivers to sit above China’s crowded traffic in an expensive off-road vehicle is a strong draw in the status-conscious society, especially for younger buyers. In addition, female SUV drivers, mostly young professionals, have been increasing steadily in China, to 19% last year from 14% in 2007, J.D. Power and LMC say.

    Analysts also say the surging SUV sales indicate the Chinese market is maturing.

    SUVs have a long history in China, dating back more than two decades to when Chrysler built Jeep Cherokees at a joint venture with Beijing Automotive. However, the market today is led by Japanese and South Korean automakers in the compact segment, and the German brands in the luxury market. Honda’s CR-V led the way last year with overall sales of some 160,000.

    Ford’s Chinese dealers, which have been limited to selling only five vehicles before this month’s rollout of the new Focus, cannot get the SUVs fast enough. At a dealership in Shanghai last Saturday, salesman Hu Jun said the reasons for consumers’ growing desire for SUVs were no surprise.

    “It’s high and big and safe, and it’s very convenient if the family wants to go out,” he says.


    1:00 pm on April 23, 2012
     
  • You gotta love capitalism. Yesterday’s terrorist haven is today’s burgeoning market. In a recent report in Automotive News, none other than Iraq is the new darling of major automobile manufacturers. The automotive tome noted that Volkswagen, General Motors, Ford and Chrysler are all pushing to expand their presence in the formerly (and, skeptics might say still) war-torn Middle Eastern country.

    Iraq’s automobile market is currently less than 100,000 units annually, but, thanks to rising incomes, rapid economic growth and so-called safer streets (hey, only “1,500 Iraqi civilians were killed by bombs, sniper and roadside ambushes last year,” according to Automotive News, down from a peak of 34,500 in 2006), so Automotive News is reporting that some major players are forecasting growth of as much as 30%. General Motors already sells 32,000 cars there a year, making it the company’s second largest market in the Middle East after Saudi Arabia. That’s a mere pittance compared with the 9.025 million vehicles The General sold last year, but the company had targeted the Middle East for expansion. Sectarian violence, improvised explosive devices and state-fuelled religious intolerance be damned, we can sell them some cars, so let’s build us some dealerships.

    Of course, any additional successful market is desperately needed if the auto industry’s recent revival is to continue unabated. China is, by most estimations, slowing its recently explosive growth. Ditto India. And just when you thought we could go back to ignoring the Europeans (thanks to the collective sigh we all breathed when Greece’s bond devaluation deal was finally signed) comes news that the entire EU auto market is about to come tumbling down, dragging all of us with it.

    Bloomberg News is reporting that General Motors sees “clearly deteriorating” sales exacerbating the same kind of production overcapacity that crippled the American auto industry before its bankruptcies/restructuring/debt reduction of 2009 to 2011. According to Dan Amman, GM’s chief financial officer, worsening vehicle pricing — transaction prices are said to have dropped more than $200 in just the last three months — indicate greatly reduced demand. GM, Bloomberg reports, lost $747-million in Europe last year and $15.6-billion since 1999. The $420-million tie-up with PSA/Peugeot-Citroën reported in this column two weeks ago is the company’s most recent attempt to address its overcapacity issues.

    And, unlike the most recent downturn, automakers are not counting on government “scrappage” incentives to artificially boost sales. Despite the recent improvement in Greece’s debt relief, the European economy continues to sour, weighed down by massive debt, debilitating unemployment and chronic over-regulation of the industry. Throw in the fact that, by some estimations, the Europeans may have as much as 20% too much automobile production capacity for current market demands and you have the same recipe for disaster that plagued the U.S. automakers through the last two decades.

    The difference is that our domestic auto industry has already swallowed its Buckley’s — you know, “It tastes awful. But it works” — General Motors declaring bankruptcy (as did Chrysler), shucking income-dragging brands (as did Ford), laying off workers (as did both Chrysler and Ford) and shuttering plants (ditto Chrysler and Ford). Save for the seemingly never-ending death spiral of Saab (and its demise was sparked by GM), Europeans did not react to — or, as those nasty vulture capitalists might say, did not take advantage of — the Great Recession with any dramatic restructuring. Indeed, Fiat CEO Sergio Marchionne recently called for European Union intervention in reducing the industry’s overcapacity, though Volkswagen, the only major European automaker to make a profit last year, rejects such calls for government intervention.
    The result, as anyone who’s ever tried to peel off a Band-Aid slowly knows, would appear to be a simple delay of the inevitable pain. Hence why Opel is crawling into bed with PSA/Peugeot-Citroën and Fiat is willing to sleep with, well, just about anybody. Volkswagen is said to be fuelling the troublesome price declines by using its heft — and profits from its successful luxury brands — to buy market share. No wonder Marchionne has been so preoccupied with expanding his Fiat/Chrysler/Who-wants-to-love-me-now conglomerate.

    Of course, all this may be the same tempest in a teapot that the Greek debt crisis turned out to be (says he, crossing all his fingers and toes in the hopes that he jumped back into the stock market at the right time). The Economist, in its latest issue — Crikey, Ginger! Can It Be … The Recovery?!! — is predicting a steady, if subdued, recovery (albeit with the same aforementioned crossing of hearts and hoping to die) that would seem to make any weakness in the European auto market of minimal consequence.

    Of course, General Motors guaranteed it was not declaring Chapter 11 and Rob Ford promised Torontonians a subway.


    8:00 am on March 29, 2012