PDA

View Full Version : Detroit Sees Cheap Gas as History



RandomGuy
08-29-2006, 11:59 AM
(New York Times)
By MICHELINE MAYNARD
Published: August 29, 2006
TOLEDO, Ohio, Aug. 28 — The Chrysler Group, which depends more heavily on sales of pickup trucks and sport utility vehicles than any other Detroit automaker, said Monday that it expected gasoline prices to remain at $3 to $4 a gallon for the rest of this decade.

Skip to next paragraph
Related
Buyouts at Ford Are No. 1 Topic for Union Leaders Tuesday (August 29, 2006) The comments by Thomas W. LaSorda, Chrysler’s chief executive, are the first time a Detroit automaker has issued a specific forecast on gas prices since they began climbing to $3 a gallon and higher.

Ford’s chief sales analyst agreed Monday that high gas prices were not a temporary phenomenon, although he did not cite a price range. The analyst, George Pipas, said the auto company expected gas prices to remain high, volatile and unpredictable.

Together, the comments signal a recognition that the two automakers may have to fundamentally change their product mix to put more emphasis on fuel-efficient vehicles — a move General Motors says it already is making.

Mr. LaSorda, who had traveled here for the start of production of a four-door version of the Jeep Wrangler, was asked whether gasoline prices had peaked. “I would hope so,’’ he replied, “but we’re planning internally as if it is $3 to $4 a gallon.”

Mr. LaSorda said Chrysler had prepared a business model based on the assumption that gas prices would remain in that range for the next three to four years. That is about the period of time it takes for an automaker to develop a new vehicle.

“We are looking at it as if it’s going to be much higher, rather than hoping it comes down,” Mr. LaSorda said. He added, “Hopefully we can fight back.”

If Chrysler’s assumptions are correct, it spells more trouble in the near term for the traditional Detroit companies, whose sales and market share have dropped this year as consumers have shifted away from big vehicles to more fuel-efficient models.

About 75 percent of the vehicles that Chrysler sells are pickups, sport utility vehicles and minivans, compared with about two-thirds of the sales by the Ford Motor Company and about 60 percent of the vehicles sold by General Motors, according to the industry statistics firm Autodata.

By contrast, the lineups at Toyota, Honda and Nissan are still more than 50 percent cars, one reason Japanese auto companies have achieved sales records this year.

Although Chrysler plans to introduce more fuel-efficient vehicles in coming months, it may face a struggle to lessen its dependence on sport utility vehicles and pickups. Indeed, Mr. LaSorda said that Chrysler believed there would still be a market for vehicles that seat five or six passengers.

Given the long lead time auto companies require to develop new vehicles, "I don’t know if they will be able to come out with new products that quickly,” said Jesse Toprak, a senior analyst with Edmunds.com, a Web site that offers car-buying advice.

Last month, Chrysler’s share of the American market dropped to just 10 percent, compared with 13.3 percent in July 2005. Chrysler fell to fifth place in July, behind G.M., Toyota, Ford and Honda.

Chrysler is not the only company feeling the pinch of higher gasoline prices. Industrywide, pickup truck sales have dropped about 17 percent this year, while sales of sport utility vehicles are down about 9 percent. Car sales, by contrast, are up 3 percent, according to an Edmunds estimate.

Mr. Toprak said none of the Detroit auto companies thought high gasoline prices would hurt sales so much. “They saw it as a temporary phenomenon,” Mr. Toprak said.

Gasoline prices have dropped about 15 cents the last two weeks, to a national average of $2.78 for unleaded fuel, according to the Lundberg Survey. That has led some analysts to predict that prices have peaked for the year, since gasoline is generally cheaper in the fall than during the summer vacation season.

Asked about gasoline prices, Mr. Pipas, of Ford, said, “We don’t see the price of gasoline returning to the levels that we all enjoyed in the 90’s and the early part of this decade.”

He went on, “The base case assumption around which we’re planning our business is that gas prices remain high. The days of inexpensive gasoline are gone.”

Mr. Pipas declined to be specific about how high gas prices may rise. “I think only a fool would forecast gas prices,” he said.

G.M. forecasts prices internally but does not disclose the figure, said a spokesman, John M. McDonald.

G.M. has been promoting the fuel efficiency of its car lineup, saying it offers more models that get 30 miles per gallon in highway driving than any other company. Through July, those vehicles accounted for about 34 percent of G.M.’s overall sales for 2006, according to an estimate by Edmunds.

Mr. McDonald said G.M. was paying more attention to the fluctuations in gasoline prices, rather than the level itself. “It’s the fluctuation that makes people nervous,” he added.

Officials at Toyota and Honda, which have both gained market share this year because of their reputation for fuel efficiency, said they were prepared for a sustained period of high gasoline prices.

“We don’t anticipate that gas prices are going to drop significantly,” said Chuck Schifsky, a Honda spokesman. He added, “We’ve known for a long time that this was coming, and it’s liable to get worse before it gets any better.”

Mr. Toprak at Edmunds said automakers were rattled by the prospect of another hurricane like Katrina, which sent gas prices soaring a year ago. “Who knows what is going to happen? It could make a worse-case scenario even worse,” Mr. Toprak said.

Nick Bunkley contributed reporting from Detroit for this article.

boutons_
08-29-2006, 12:32 PM
“We’ve known for a long time that this was coming"

But we've done fuck all about it. We've given the customer what what they want (actually, the Japanese have been better than Detroit even at that), and now we're fucked.

101A
08-29-2006, 12:54 PM
Diesel - it's amazing the quantity of oil burners sold in Europe vs. here.

EPA regulations on particulate emmissions keeps 'em on the other side of the pond. 30% better economy in cars; better economy & towing in small trucks.

boutons_
08-29-2006, 01:23 PM
I can't the article, but diesels are supposed to be hitting the US market in a big way in 07/08.

=========

still can't find it, but here's a typical page indicating many mfrs are making moves toward diesel cars.

http://mydrive.roadfly.com/blog/ExJxZ3/

Extra Stout
08-29-2006, 02:11 PM
I can't the article, but diesels are supposed to be hitting the US market in a big way in 07/08.

=========

still can't find it, but here's a typical page indicating many mfrs are making moves toward diesel cars.

http://mydrive.roadfly.com/blog/ExJxZ3/
Yeah, once the low-sulfur diesel is available nationwide, then the diesel particulate filters will work.

For the driving most Americans do, diesel is the better choice.

RandomGuy
08-29-2006, 02:12 PM
My understanding is that diesel engines, even clean burning ones, are still nastier by far in terms of several types of pollution.

Based on this, I would assume diesel is more doable in europe because fuel is so expensive and many don't own vehicles. Having a larger percentage of diesels doesn't mean as much when you have much smaller absolute numbers of vehicles.

If anybody has some good articles on new deisel engines, feel free to post them.

Extra Stout
08-29-2006, 02:26 PM
My understanding is that diesel engines, even clean burning ones, are still nastier by far in terms of several types of pollution.

Based on this, I would assume diesel is more doable in europe because fuel is so expensive and many don't own vehicles. Having a larger percentage of diesels doesn't mean as much when you have much smaller absolute numbers of vehicles.

If anybody has some good articles on new deisel engines, feel free to post them.
Your understanding is incomplete. Diesel is more doable in Europe because fuel has been expensive for a long time, such that the added cost of complicated pollution mitigation equipment in the vehicles is offset by the improved fuel economy.

boutons_
08-29-2006, 02:44 PM
Europeans encouraged diesel with taxes because diesel gave much better mileage than gasoline.

Eurropeans also encouraged 4 cylinders engine by penalizing/taxing more cylinders and higher CCs, going back 30 - 40 years.

http://www.dieselforum.org/meet-clean-diesel/what-is-clean-diesel/

Europeans have discouraged inefficient automobiles and all automobiles with very high taxes on all transport fuels.

101A
08-29-2006, 03:00 PM
A taste of the cars Europe gets, but we are deprived of:

From Caranddriver.com (http://www.caranddriver.com/roadtests/11344/road-test-review-2006-bmw-330d.html)

DarkReign
08-29-2006, 03:43 PM
Buy American.

Extra Stout
08-29-2006, 03:49 PM
Buy American.
If you agree to round up all the American executives at the Big 2.5, have them caravanned out to a field, and shoot them, then replace them with non-sycophant/non-idiots who can make business plans past the next 5 minutes, then we'll consider it, inasmuch as Detroit might make more cars people want.

Also, slowly torture Ron Goettelfinger to death in front of the UAW rank and file, to scare them into working harder. The Saturn Aura was supposed to have The Best GM Interior Ever, yet now that it is out it still has that crappy UAW build quality.

101A
08-29-2006, 04:04 PM
Buy American.

Demand better cars. Buy what is best for your $$$$ - THEN the American Automakers will wake up and build cars that truly compete. Blindly buying what is offered up is what has allowed the "big 3" to continue with the medicre offerings they are famous for.

Besides, if you REALLY want to help locals out in SA; buy a Toyota Truck.

Extra Stout
08-29-2006, 04:14 PM
Be loyal and patriotic, Volk! Buy East German!
http://www.team.net/www/ktud/images/601_2s.jpg

Nbadan
08-29-2006, 04:19 PM
As the BP pipeline fiasco has shown, the petroleum industry is incapable of patrolling itself. This is why people need government to protect it from any possible market manipulation. Since Dubya's been in office its been open season for oil companies to pretty much do as they please. It's the market manipulation of California energy by Enron all over again, only this time its the OilCos and the Saudis who are sticking it to American energy consumers. Californians knew what to do, throw the bumms out! Energy crisis over!

DarkReign
08-30-2006, 09:36 AM
'Twas a joke, gentlemen (ladies if applicable).

DarkReign
08-30-2006, 09:38 AM
Demand better cars. Buy what is best for your $$$$ - THEN the American Automakers will wake up and build cars that truly compete. Blindly buying what is offered up is what has allowed the "big 3" to continue with the medicre offerings they are famous for.

Besides, if you REALLY want to help locals out in SA; buy a Toyota Truck.

Hey, I totally agree. Like I said, it was a joke. But I work with those auto companies. If I want to do business with most of them, driving a foreign car isnt exactly good for business. Besides, most plants here dont even allow you to park on their lot. So unless you want to park somewhere else and walk, I'll buy American.

My dream car....Subaru WRX.

DarkReign
08-30-2006, 09:40 AM
If you agree to round up all the American executives at the Big 2.5, have them caravanned out to a field, and shoot them, then replace them with non-sycophant/non-idiots who can make business plans past the next 5 minutes, then we'll consider it, inasmuch as Detroit might make more cars people want.

Also, slowly torture Ron Goettelfinger to death in front of the UAW rank and file, to scare them into working harder. The Saturn Aura was supposed to have The Best GM Interior Ever, yet now that it is out it still has that crappy UAW build quality.

:lmao Do you work in the field? Your literacy screams "NO!"

I could make an entire thread dedicated to nothing more than Union stories. Before I had this job, I never truly understood the kind of power the UAW wielded in all facets of the auto business.

01Snake
08-30-2006, 09:45 AM
They are saying gas is going to be $2 by Thanksgiving. :)

johnsmith
08-30-2006, 09:52 AM
:lol i'll slap a W sticker on the back window of my brand-new Tahoe if that happens


Man, you're and idiot.

101A
08-30-2006, 09:53 AM
:lol i'll slap a W sticker on the back window of my brand-new Tahoe if that happens

Screw the Tahoe, I'm gettin' a 'Sclade.

DarkReign
08-30-2006, 10:34 AM
and i think we all can agree that you'd be an idiot to support the Big '3' because they are American companies... :lol :lol :lol FUCK THEM. and Fuck the big ass unions too. getting paid 15 dollars an hour to push a fucking button

Not to be picky, but just last week I found out the janitor makes $19.35 (annual % increase for inflation).

DarkReign
08-30-2006, 10:35 AM
Here's an idea: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14578669/

Prostitution is legal in Australia? Man, the US is so prude.

DarkReign
08-30-2006, 10:36 AM
:wow

Yeah, no shit.

101A
08-30-2006, 10:39 AM
...and I drive an ARMADA (so big, named after a whole damned flotilla of boats) - boy could I get some discounted "services".

RandomGuy
09-06-2006, 12:33 PM
Be loyal and patriotic, Volk! Buy East German!
http://www.team.net/www/ktud/images/601_2s.jpg

TRAPPIs!!!

heh the "cardboard" cars of the old east germany.

For those who don't know, they were unmitigated peices of excrement, but are kind of part of german pop culture, kind of like classic VW beetles.

RandomGuy
09-06-2006, 12:36 PM
and i think we all can agree that you'd be an idiot to support the Big '3' because they are American companies... :lol :lol :lol FUCK THEM. and Fuck the big ass unions too. getting paid 15 dollars an hour to push a fucking button

It's not the pay, its the retirement packages. Care to guess who those companies are going to hand off their retirement packages to?

(hint it rhymes with "paxpayers")

I am all for being honest about these things and just hand off health care and pensions to the government.

As it is we just sort of force government to do it anyways, why do it willy-nilly and "off the books"?

101A
09-06-2006, 01:39 PM
and i think we all can agree that you'd be an idiot to support the Big '3' because they are American companies... :lol :lol :lol FUCK THEM. and Fuck the big ass unions too. getting paid 15 dollars an hour to push a fucking button


$15 an hour? What rock are you hiding under? We're talking UAW, baby. $35 per for a button pusher.

RG - handing pensions and healthcare off to the government will not fix them. It will, however, make them equally bad for all of us.

I have a company that provides very good health and retirement benefits. It will be a shame if my employees can't enjoy the priviledge of those because other companies mismanaged there own houses, and the government reacts to that.

RandomGuy
09-07-2006, 09:43 AM
RG - handing pensions and healthcare off to the government will not fix them. It will, however, make them equally bad for all of us.

I have a company that provides very good health and retirement benefits. It will be a shame if my employees can't enjoy the priviledge of those because other companies mismanaged there own houses, and the government reacts to that.

I beg to differ.

As it stands now we have NO plan of dealing with it. At least when the government handles it, we will have some recourse other than shrugging our shoulders.

It is "equally" bad for all of us already. If you think that insurance isn't more expensive because of those that don't have insurance, rethink that.

The other thing to think of as a business owner is how much more efficient you would be by not having to offer such coverage.

How much time, effort, and money does it take the private sector to deal with the mishmash that we have now?

If, after a national health care plan goes into effect, you want to offer an additional incentive of better coverage, that is still an option.

As it is now, what is the cost to american business of sicker americans without health care?

How many avoidable sick days are soaked up by people having to use the emergency room as primary medical care?

johnsmith
09-07-2006, 10:01 AM
How many avoidable sick days are soaked up by people having to use the emergency room as primary medical care?


People use sick days when they are sick? Who knew?

101A
09-07-2006, 10:05 AM
I beg to differ.

As it stands now we have NO plan of dealing with it. At least when the government handles it, we will have some recourse other than shrugging our shoulders.

It is "equally" bad for all of us already. If you think that insurance isn't more expensive because of those that don't have insurance, rethink that.

The other thing to think of as a business owner is how much more efficient you would be by not having to offer such coverage.

How much time, effort, and money does it take the private sector to deal with the mishmash that we have now?

If, after a national health care plan goes into effect, you want to offer an additional incentive of better coverage, that is still an option.

As it is now, what is the cost to american business of sicker americans without health care?

How many avoidable sick days are soaked up by people having to use the emergency room as primary medical care?

Preach to another business owner.

My company processes medical claims. :smokin

johnsmith
09-07-2006, 10:08 AM
Preach to another business owner.

My company processes medical claims. :smokin


I hate your company. You are alright, but I hate your company. Don't know which company it is, but anything involving medical claims is automatically hated by me. No offense though.

RandomGuy
09-07-2006, 10:21 AM
People use sick days when they are sick? Who knew?

The point being, of course, that sick days=lost productivity=smaller economy

RandomGuy
09-07-2006, 10:25 AM
Preach to another business owner.

My company processes medical claims. :smokin

In all due seriousness, this process would still be needed by any form of health plan.

Coincidentally, I have been spending my morning reading a claim database. Mmmm databases... :drool:

101A
09-07-2006, 10:27 AM
I beg to differ.

As it stands now we have NO plan of dealing with it. At least when the government handles it, we will have some recourse other than shrugging our shoulders.

It is "equally" bad for all of us already. If you think that insurance isn't more expensive because of those that don't have insurance, rethink that.

The other thing to think of as a business owner is how much more efficient you would be by not having to offer such coverage.

How much time, effort, and money does it take the private sector to deal with the mishmash that we have now?

If, after a national health care plan goes into effect, you want to offer an additional incentive of better coverage, that is still an option.

As it is now, what is the cost to american business of sicker americans without health care?

How many avoidable sick days are soaked up by people having to use the emergency room as primary medical care?

I have some employees over age 65 - who are Medicair eligible. You think they jump off of my plan and into Medicair. No, they don't. They like the plan they receive as a benefit of working for my company, more.

Under a national healthcare system that choice will be taken from them, and every other employee, for that matter.

The largest check I write each month (even greater than the cost of all benefits for all employees combined), is the check I write to the IRS to deposit the money withheld for each employees income tax, medicare/medicaid, social security + the employer match. I shudder to think how large that check could get if it included subsidizing an inefficient, ill-conceived, pork-laden universal healthcare plan. It COULD work, it COULD be designed and managed so that it truly lowered the overall cost of the delivery of healthcare in this country. But it won't be. This is the United States Government - the only entity in the cosmos that can spend $100,000 on an anvil, and then break it.

Medicair? Overbudget and diskliked. Medicaid? WAY overbudget. War on Poverty? Failed. Social Security? Going bankrupt.

How many time does the government have to screw something up before people realize the government is ill equipped to do damn near anything, and should only be left to do the things it HAS to do?

RandomGuy
09-08-2006, 08:05 AM
I have some employees over age 65 - who are Medicair eligible. You think they jump off of my plan and into Medicair. No, they don't. They like the plan they receive as a benefit of working for my company, more.

Under a national healthcare system that choice will be taken from them, and every other employee, for that matter.

So the government will FORCE people to use their healthcare?

Or will employers still be able to offer additional insurance if they so choose?


The largest check I write each month (even greater than the cost of all benefits for all employees combined), is the check I write to the IRS to deposit the money withheld for each employees income tax, medicare/medicaid, social security + the employer match. I shudder to think how large that check could get if it included subsidizing an inefficient, ill-conceived, pork-laden universal healthcare plan.

You think that what we have now isn't wasteful and inefficient?

When companies merge, they generally get rid of duplicated roles. Why? Because that is inefficient.

You think that private industry with thousands of different companies isn't inefficient?

You think that you aren't paying the costs RIGHT NOW of people without health insurance? You pay higher premiums for the health insurance you offer, you pay higher prices in all the goods you buy for the same reason. As a nation we pay higher costs from decreased productivity due to lack of access to medical care.



How many time does the government have to screw something up before people realize the government is ill equipped to do damn near anything, and should only be left to do the things it HAS to do?

How long will it take before the costs of doing nothing out weigh the costs of even a poorly managed government program?