(Sources: Autoblog Green , Green Car Congress, NY Times Wheels, Green Car Reports)

The internet as well as the automotive world has been abuzz with a lot of discussions since this morning after General Motors CEO Fritz Henderson revealed what the company’s mysterious ‘230’ ad campaign was about.  It turned out to be the official mileage rating for GM’s upcoming 2011 Chevrolet Volt extended-range electric car.

GM must be basking in the new found glory (though it sounds more temporary as the intelligent folks around the web are starting to dig out the details behind this 230mpg claim). GM’s Twitter account was proudly re-tweeting a post that goes like this: 230 mpg city, great. More than 100 mpg combined, even better. Not being stranded after 300+ miles, priceless.   Mind you!  This is just a sample of what’s been such a flood of good PR for GM. after this 230 unveiling.

For many smart folks, a number like that seems outlandish, absurd. How can the US Environmental Protection Agency possibly measure fuel consumption that low? The answer, it turns out, is all in the assumptions.

Our friends at Autoblog says “Without access to the actual method that the EPA is tentatively going to apply to plug-in vehicles (we have requests for clarification out to the EPA), all that GM’s Dave Darovitz would tell us is that the number is “based on city cycles and we’re not really talking in detail yet.” Instead, the press release says that: Under the new methodology being developed, EPA weights plug-in electric vehicles as traveling more city miles than highway miles on only electricity. The EPA methodology uses kilowatt hours per 100 miles traveled to define the electrical efficiency of plug-ins. Applying EPA’s methodology, GM expects the Volt to consume as little as 25 kilowatt hours per 100 miles in city driving. At the U.S. average cost of electricity (approximately 11 cents per kWh), a typical Volt driver would pay about $2.75 for electricity to travel 100 miles, or less than 3 cents per mile.

Which leads to the big question: What assumptions should the EPA make in its emissions and gas-mileage tests about how the Volt is used (also known as the car’s “duty cycle”)?

For decades, gasoline cars (and ) have been testing using two cycles: city and highway. That gives us the two quoted EPA mileage ratings, and the EPA also calculates a “blended” number for overall usage. The distance driven doesn’t really matter.

But for the Volt, mileage assumptions become much more political.  If the EPA tests a Volt over a cycle of less than 40 miles, it will never burn any gasoline, and it’ll get that “infinite” mileage. The daily distance matters much more for the Volt than for a gas engined car.

The answer appears to be the EPA has adopted a cycle described by GM-Volt.com, among others, that assumes the Volt is driven until the battery is discharged–and then slightly more on gasoline power.

A similar test routine proposed by Mike Duoba at Argonne National Laboratories repeatedly drives the car on four EPA highway test cycles until the battery is discharged, then drives one city cycle–totaling 51 miles. (The EPA city cycle is roughly 11 miles, the highway cycle about 10 miles.)

If the engine runs for 11 miles at 50 mpg, that will use 0.22 gallons of gasoline. But that amount is used over a total travel distance of 51 miles, which works out to 232 mpg. Sounds like 230 mpg to us!

Jim Motavalli wrote on his Wheels column on  New York Times : The problem with claiming 230 miles a gallon was that to get at numbers like that you can’t simply measure its fuel consumption. The plug-in hybrid’s small gas engine is there to provide power for the electric motors, not drive the wheels, and the first 40 miles are on the batteries alone.

G.M. can plug its numbers into the E.P.A. city driving cycle and get stellar results, but, as they say, actual results — and planetary impact — will vary quite a bit. How and where you drive the Volt will matter quite a bit, too. “If you’re heavy footed, you’re not going to get 230 miles per gallon,” said Roland Hwang, transportation program director at the Natural Resources Defense Council.

In a detailed article published by Green Car Congress one can learn how this fuel economy rating is measured.  While the fuel economy (FE) for combustible fueled vehicles (such as gasoline, diesel, compressed natural gas, or an ethanol blend) can easily be expressed in mpg, and fuel economy for an all-electric vehicle can be expressed in miles per gallon of gasoline equivalent (mpge), the arrival of new technologies that can operate in all-electric mode, a conventional hybrid mode, or some combination of the two complicates the situation.

The EPA is revisiting the FE label provisions as they apply to those types of vehicles, and is working with automakers, the SAE, the State of California, the Department of Energy and others to address these issues. The EPA anticipates issuing guidance and/or a rule this year.

According to US Department of Transportation data, nearly eight of 10 Americans commute fewer than 40 miles a day. A Volt driver’s actual gas-free mileage will vary depending on how far he or she travels and other factors, such as how much cargo or how many passengers they carry and how much the air conditioner or other accessories are used. Tony Posawatz, Vehicle Line Director for the Volt, said that the Volt is delivering 40 miles all electric in both city and highway cycles.

However, Posawatz notes that since the Volt results are based on a single charge per day—and that given the recharge time of 6-8 hours on a standard 110V outlet or half that on a 240V charger, the Volt has the potential to deliver better than 230 mpg performance if it can charge multiple times per day.

Click here to read the entire article.

(Source: Washington Post, Jalopnik, Autoblog)

Car can extend its range to more than 300 miles with its flex fuel-powered engine-generator.

Image Courtesy: Autoblog

In case you missed it this morning, General Motors CEO Fritz Henderson made some big news just one month after the “new” GM emerged from bankruptcy protection.

General Motors announced today that its forthcoming electric vehicle, the Chevrolet Volt, will achieve city fuel economy of 230 miles per gallon, under testing that used draft federal fuel economy methodology standards for plug-in cars.

The Volt will become the first mass-produced vehicle to obtain a triple-digit MPG rating, the company said.

“The Volt is becoming very real, very fast,” chief executive Fritz Henderson said. “The price of oil is going to go up.”

According to Frank Weber, vehicle chief engineer for the Volt, the number is based on combined electric only driving and charge sustaining mode with the engine running. He declined to get specific about the proportions, but did say that the urban cycle would be predominantly EV only. The EPA has been studying real world vehicle usage and is developing the formulas to try and provide a representative number of what most customers could expect to achieve. In addition to the composite number, the new EPA stickers will likely also get numbers for mileage in charge sustaining mode and electric efficiency in EV mode.

Initial prices for the car may be as much as $40,000, analysts said.

But company officials said the car’s price is expected to come down over time. They note, moreover, that gas prices will rise again, making fuel-efficient cars more valuable.

The Volt, which is scheduled to start production late next year, is expected to travel up to 40 miles on electricity from a single battery charge. The company says the car can extend its range to more han 300 miles with its flex fuel-powered engine-generator.

Assuming the average cost of electricity is approximately 11 cents per kilowatt-hour in the United States, a typical Volt driver would pay about $2.75 for electricity to travel 100 miles, or less than 3 cents per mile.

This story’s still developing, but if our sources are correct, it would blow the Toyota Prius out of the water. Heck, it’d blow every other vehicle currently on the market out of the water with the exception of the Tesla roadster — and that’s no four-door mid-size sedan. So for GM this represents a huge marketing coup — the ability to claim the most fuel efficient vehicle in the world and a big blow to detractors who claim the big, sweaty ‘merican manufacturer can’t build quality products.

Click here to read the entire article.

(Source: Detroit News via Autoblog & Bloomberg)

Image Courtesy: Apture - Ford Focus

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has processed 80,500 transactions so far, and the early winner of Cash For Clunkers appears to be the Ford Focus. The Detroit News is reporting that the Focus is the number one vehicle purchased under the government program, showing us why Ford’s C-Segment vehicle gained 43.6% in July. Ford also saw an amazing 97% increase in Escape sales in July, a tally that was likely improved with the help of Cash For Clunkers.

The controversial and somewhat clumsy program is drawing plenty of attention for its popularity amongst car buyers, and Detroit automakers appear to be taking more than their fair share of sales.

The White House says 47% of all vehicles sold through the bill so far come from US automakers; 2% higher than the domestics’ 45% overall share. Four of the top 10 vehicles purchased under the program come from domestic automakers, and over half of all vehicles were built in the States.

This wildly popular program is currently all but spent and is awaiting the Senate nod for a further $2Billion cash infusion to keep it going.   On Friday, the House approved the $2 billion increase. The Senate is expected to vote Wednesday or Thursday; the White House is pressing it to act. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood told MSNBC that the program has been a “lifeline to the economy.”

To drum up support for more dollars, the White House is touting the program’s value. White House spokesman Robert Gibbs says the average fuel economy increase so far is 9.4 mpg; a 61% increase verses the vehicles destined for a sodium silicate bath. So far, 83% of the vehicles traded in have been trucks, while 60% of the vehicles purchased under the program have been cars. The White House estimates that Cash For Clunkers will save the average car buyer $700 – $1,000 in gas prices during the life of the vehicle.

The sales last month from the federal incentives may result in fewer buyers later this year after the program ends, George Pipas, Ford’s sales analyst, told CNBC today.

A similar program in Germany won’t sustain sales growth into 2010 as those incentives expire, said Matthias Wissmann, president of the German carmakers, today at a Frankfurt news conference. Germany’s car market expanded by 26 percent from a year earlier in the first half, propelled by increases of at least 40 percent in May and June.

Our favorite auto website,  Jalopnik, offers a comprehensive list of the top 10 vehicles  sold and trade-ins) dealt under this CARS program.

The Ten Most Traded-In Vehicles (vehicle’s EPA mileage)
1. 1998 Ford Explorer (14-17 mpg)
2. 1997 Ford Explorer (14-18 mpg)
3. 1996 Ford Explorer (14-18 mpg)
4. 1999 Ford Explorer (14-18 mpg)
5. Jeep Grand Cherokee
6. Jeep Cherokee
7. 1995 Ford Explorer (15-18 mpg)
8. 1994 Ford Explorer (15-18 mpg)
9. 1997 Ford Windstar (18 mpg)
10. 1999 Dodge Caravan (16-18 mpg)

The Ten Most Purchased Vehicles (vehicle’s EPA mileage)
1. Ford Focus (27-28 mpg)
2. Honda Civic (24-42 mpg)
3. Toyota Corolla (25-30 mpg)
4. Toyota Prius (46 mpg)
5. Ford Escape (20-32 mpg)
6. Toyota Camry (23-34 mpg)
7. Dodge Caliber (22-27 mpg)
8. Hyundai Elantra (26-28 mpg)
9. Honda Fit (29-31 mpg)
10. Chevy Cobalt (25-30 mpg

Click here to read the entire article.

(Source: Green Car Congress)

GM’s domestic sales of the automaker and its joint ventures in China jumped to 144,593 units—an increase of 77.7 percent compared to last year. This was GM China’s best July ever, extending an uninterrupted series of single month sales records that started in January 2009.

For the first seven months as a whole, GM China and its joint ventures sold 959,035 vehicles, up 42.8% in comparison with the first seven months of last year.

Shanghai GM registered year-on-year sales growth of 60.6% in July to 56,489 units.

Click here to read the entire article.

(Source: Wall Street Journal, Detroit Free Press,  Reuters, Autoblog, JDPower.com)

* Ford, Chevrolet close in on Toyota brand

* Lexus, Porsche rank No. 1 and No. 2 for new car quality

* BMW’s Mini ranks last in J.D. Power survey

New vehicles sold by Chrysler, Ford and GM’s domestic brands have improved in initial quality by an average of 10% compared with 2008, but Toyota Motor Corp. was the star of this year’s study on initial quality from J.D. Power and Associates.

The study was released today at an Automotive Press Association luncheon at the Detroit Athletic Club.

Image Courtesy: J.D Power and Associates via Autoblog

Toyota’s Lexus brand ranked first among all nameplates with 84 problems per 100 vehicles. Toyota also captured 10 segment awards — more than any other corporation in the 2009 study.

Luxury brands captured the top three spots, while Chevrolet, Ford and Toyota were in what amounted to a statistical dead heat further down in the rankings, the survey by J.D. Power and Associates found.

“Have the leading domestic nameplates caught up with Toyota? The answer is almost,” Dave Sargent, vice president for auto research at J.D. Power, told reporters at a briefing in Detroit. The quality gap between the foreign imports and the Detroit auto makers is now the smallest it has ever been, David Sargent, JD Power’s vice president of automotive research, said during a speech at the Automotive Press Association in Detroit. The domestics lagged behind the foreign auto makers by just six points.

The 2009 Initial Quality Study (IQS) provides information gathered from over 80,000 purchasers and lessees of 2009 model-year vehicles. Performance is measured using a “problems per 100 vehicles (PP100)” metric. A lower PP100 score indicates better performance and a higher PP100 score indicates worse performance. The 2009 study covers a total of 228 total problems, and organizes them into the following eight categories:

• Exterior
• The Driving Experience
• Features/Controls/Displays
• Audio/Entertainment/Navigation
• Seats
• HVAC, or Climate Controls
• Interior
• Engine/Transmission

The highlights of the 2009 IQS study (courtesy of J.D. Power & Associates):

• Overall, the industry average for initial quality is 108 problems per 100 vehicles (PP100) in 2009, down from 118 PP100 in 2008. Initial quality for domestic brands has improved to an average of 112 PP100 in 2009 from 124 PP100 in 2008, while import brands have improved to an average of 106 PP100 in 2009 from 114 PP100 in 2008.
• Lexus leads the overall nameplate rankings, averaging 84 PP100. This is the 12th time Lexus has been the highest-ranked brand in the 20 years it has been included in the IQS and the first time since 2005.
• Following in the rankings are Porsche, Cadillac (which moves from 10th rank position in 2008 to third in 2009),Hyundai (improves from 13th rank position in 2008 to fourth in 2009) and Honda, rounding out the top five.
• Toyota Motor Corporation captures 10 segment awards—more than any other automaker in the 2009 study—including five for Lexus, four for Toyota and one forScion. Lexus receives awards for the IS, GS, GX, LSand LX models. The Lexus LX has the fewest quality problems in the industry, with just 52 PP100. Toyota models receiving awards in their respective segments are the 4Runner (in a tie); Sienna; Tundra (in a tie); andYaris.
• Ford receives three awards for the Edge (in a tie); F-150 (in a tie); and Mustang. Garnering two awards each are Nissan (Altima and Z); and Honda (CR-V, in a tie, and Ridgeline).
• Also receiving segment awards are: Chevrolet TrailBlazer (in a tie), Chrysler PT Cruiser (in a tie), GMC Yukon, Hyundai Elantra Sedan, Mercury Sable and Scion tC.
• Suzuki is the most-improved nameplate in the industry this year. A reduction of 49 PP100 moves the Japanese brand from 32nd place in 2008 to ninth place this year. Suzuki is also the most improved nameplate for both Defects/Malfunctions and Design-related problems. Also, Saturn improves by 37 PP100 and Jeep by 30 PP100.
• The Toyota Motor Corporation assembly plant in Higashi-Fuji, Japan, receives the Platinum Plant Quality Award for producing vehicles yielding the fewest defects and malfunctions. Averaging just 29 PP100, the plant produces the Lexus SC 430 and Toyota Corolla. (Plant awards are based solely on average levels of defects and malfunctions and exclude design-related problems.)
• Among North and South American plants, the Honda plant in East Liberty, Ohio, which produces the Civic Sedan, CR-V and Element, achieves the Gold Plant Quality Award.
• In the Europe and Africa region, Daimler’s East London, South Africa, plant, which produces the Mercedes-Benz C-Class, receives the Gold Plant Quality Award.

The results underscored the competitive pressure on the industry at a time when U.S. sales have been driven to 30-year lows and both GM and Chrysler have been forced to rely on federal financing to restructure through bankruptcy.

U.S. automakers have spent heavily in recent years in a bid to close the gap with the Japanese automakers led by Toyota and Honda, which have established a reputation for eliminating flaws from engineering and manufacturing.

This year, GM’s Cadillac brand is the highest ranked domestic nameplate with 91 problems per 100 vehicles. Cadillac is ranked third and moved up from 10th last year.

Ford Motor Co. received the second most segment awards of any automaker with top rankings for its redesigned F-150 pickup, Ford Mustang mid-size sports car, Ford Edge crossover and Mercury Sable full-size sedan.

Brands that do well — typically luxury cars top the list — can use the results to bolster advertising campaigns. The vehicles were evaluated between November through February. “High quality enhances an auto maker’s reputation for reliability which is a critical purchase consideration for many consumers,” Mr. Sargent said.

Boosted by a strong reception for its high-end Genesis sedan, Hyundai Motor Co (005380.KS) pushed ahead of both Toyota and Honda Motor Co (7267.T) to become the top-ranked mass-market auto brand and No. 4 overall.

Honda ranked No. 5, followed by Mercedes-Benz, Toyota, Ford and GM’s Chevrolet.

Click here to read the entire 2009 Initial Quality Study Results.

(Source: AP via Yahoo, Forbes & Autoblog)

TransportGooru was one of the earliest portals that notified about the Swedish love affair that originally reported by the Swedish National Television.  Though it was not officially confirmed by the companies involved (GM & Koenigsegg), pretty much everyone knew what is coming.  General Motors made it official this morning, Saab will soon be back in Swedish hands. In many respects, this is the most fitting result for quirky brand. Koenigsegg is an oddball itself, building insanely fast supercars in a Scandinavian country where you can’t legally drive over about 60 mph.

GM said in a memorandum of understanding that the sale would include an expected $600 million funding commitment from theEuropean Investment Bank, guaranteed by the Swedish government. Additional funding for Saab’s operations and investments would be provided by GM and Koenigsegg Group AB, it said.The sale is expected to be completed by the end of the third quarter and is subject to regulatory approvals by authorities.

Image Courtesy: Autoblog

“This is yet another significant step in the reinvention of GM and its European operations,” GM Europe President, Carl-Peter Forster, said in a statement. “Closing this deal represents the best chance for Saab to emerge a stronger company,” he said, adding “Koenigsegg Group’s unique combination of innovation, entrepreneurial spirit and financial strength, combined with Koenigsegg’s proven ability to create world-class Swedish performance cars in a highly efficient manner, made it the right choice for Saab as well as for General Motors.”

The company behind the consortium, Koenigsegg Automotive, was founded in 1994 by Christian von Koenigsegg, a Swedish sports carfanatic and entrepreneur, who remains the chief executive. It makesluxury sports cars at its headquarters, a former air force base near Angelholm, in southern Sweden.

With a full-time staff of 45, Koenigsegg makes around a dozen cars a year, customized for every buyer. The company doesn’t advertise prices for its models, but they are believed to range between 8 million and 18 million kronor ($1 million-$2.3 million) each.  Saab, on the other hand, has more than 4,000 staff worldwide, is represented in some 50 countries, and typically produces more than 100,000 cars a year.

One of the key details about the deal is the now obligatory government backing, this time in the form of a $600 million loan from the European Investment Bank, guaranteed of course by the Swedish government. That explains why minuscule Koenigsegg picked up Saab for free. It’s all about being Swedish.

“‘Saab needs to be left alone to proceed with its strategy,” says Matts Carlsson, an analyst of Goteborg Management Institute, noting that any tampering with its five-year plan to produce premium cars that are not aimed at competing with luxury brands such as BMW or Lexus ‘could destroy it.’

Crucially GM is pledging Koenigsegg its “platform and powertrain technology.” It’s very likely to include the “Epsilon 2” platform — the model (metal frame, geer box, technology) on which the latest GM European cars are based, such as the Opel and Vauxhall Insignias, says Tim Urquhart, an analyst at IHS Global Insight in London. That’s hugely significant for Koenigsegg as research and development of these platforms are a massive expenditure for automakers, he added.

Koeningsegg’s technology could prove valuable to Saab too. Koeningsegg has made a big push into green technology, making low emission, high-efficiency cars such as a flex fuel super car operating on both ethanol and petrol. It’s an area where Saab has been lagging behind its competitors, and could eventually help the company sell more cars.

It should help it increase sales volumes at Saab, which have fallen off sharply in recent years. Having access to GM’s technology will give the Swedish car maker several years to come up with a model for the future.

Koeningsegg also appears to have trumped other suitors, including Italy’s Fiat ( FIATY.PK – news – people ), which was interested in buying Saab after losing out in the race for Opel to Canada’s Magna International ( MGA – news – people ). (See “Fiat Keeps An Eye On Saab.”)

The sale of Saab to Koeningsegg marks a return to Swedish ownership after nine years in GM hands. Last year Saab posted a loss of 3 billion Swedish kronors ($384 million). It says it needs $1 billion to overhaul its business.

(Source: The Jakarta Globe)

Swedish luxury sports car maker Koenigsegg will buy Saab Automobile from US giant General Motors with the backing of Norwegian investors, Swedish television reported on Thursday.

The buyers have signed a letter of intention to buy Saab, SVT said on its website, citing anonymous sources and naming Koenigsegg and added that the negotiations could last for months.

“We are getting close to a deal done, but there are some final steps to be taken,” a source close to the matter told AFP, but would not confirm the identity of the leading bidder.

Both Saab and its parent company GM declined comment. Saab was put up for sale by General Motors, which filed for bankruptcy after being brought to its knees by falling demand amid the world economic downturn.  Saab’s reorganisation process began separately in Swedish courts in February.

Koenigsegg, set up in 1994, produces just 20 of its deluxe sports cars a year and sells each one for more than a million euros (1.4 million dollars).

Saab’s sell-off drew a little closer on Thursday after Stockholm announced it had authorised the Swedish Debt Office, which acts as a public bank to the state, to discuss guaranteeing a 500-million-euro loan made to Saab by the European Investment Bank (EIB).

“We have always said that the debt office could start negotiations on guaranteeing the loan when Saab has a new owner,” state secretary for business Joran Hagglund said in a statement.

Media reports had also said Italy’s Fiat was keen on buying Saab, but observers say such a move is now unlikely because of Fiat’s failure to acquire GM’s other European brand Opel.

Opel and its sister marque, Vauxhall, share a lot of technology with Saab.  The Saab automaker — not to be confused with a Swedish defence company also called Saab — sold 93,000 cars worldwide in 2008, according to its website.

It owes 9.7 billion kronor (1.3 billion dollars, 924 million euros) to GM — its largest individual creditor — as well as 347 million kronor to the Swedish government. Other creditors are owed 647 million kronor.

Saab, the automaker, employs about 3,400 people in Sweden. Including suppliers, some 15,000 jobs in the country are believed to be at risk if the company were to disappear.

Click here to read the entire article.

(Source: Bloomberg)

Edward E. Whitacre Jr. built AT&T Inc. into the biggest U.S. provider of telephone service over a 43-year-career. By his own admission, he becomes chairman of General Motors Corp. knowing nothing about the auto industry.

The 6-foot-4-inch Texan nicknamed “Big Ed” said steering the nation’s largest automaker after bankruptcy is “a public service.” People who know him say he can meet GM’s need for the type of transformation he orchestrated at Dallas-based AT&T.

“I don’t know anything about cars,” Whitacre, 67, said yesterday in an interview after his appointment. “A business is a business, and I think I can learn about cars. I’m not that old, and I think the business principles are the same.”

Whitacre’s selection bucks more than a half-century of tradition at GM, where the only non-executives to lead the board since 1937 were interim ChairmanKent Kresa and John Smale, who held the job from 1992 through 1995. Whitacre will take the post when Detroit-based GM exits Chapter 11, perhaps by Aug. 31.

A bachelor’s degree in industrial engineering and record in shaping a “monolithic” AT&T into a diversified enterprise make Whitacre “a good choice,” said Jim Hall, principal of 2953 Analytics auto-consulting firm in Birmingham, Michigan.

“He was one of the guys who helped create a new AT&T that wasn’t so dependent on land-line phone service,” said Hall, a former GM engineer. “There’s a parallel with General Motors. GM is not now about just making cars. It’s about re-creating itself as a 21st-century car company. They have to have somebody at the top that understands they have to make a new GM.”

“Lots of conversations” followed with Steven Rattner, the Wall Street dealmaker running President Barack Obama’s car task force, said Whitacre, adding that Treasury’s message was: “We need your help. It’s a great company. You could be a lot of assistance to GM.”

(Source:  The Auto Channel)

Edward E. Whitacre, Jr., former chairman and CEO of AT&T Inc., will become chairman of the New GM when the company is launched later this summer, GM’s interim Chairman Kent Kresa announced today. Kresa will continue to serve as interim chairman until the launch.

Whitacre, 67, was chairman and CEO of AT&T Inc. and its predecessor companies from 1990 to 2007. During his tenure, which began with Southwestern Bell, Whitacre led the company through a series of mergers and acquisitions–including that of AT&T in 2005–to create the nation’s largest provider of local, long distance and wireless services. He serves on the boards of ExxonMobil Corporation and the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Corporation and holds a degree in industrial engineering from Texas Technological University.

The six other members of the current board will most likely retire no later than the approval of the sale of GM assets to the new entity. A selection process is currently underway for four more directors to serve on the board of the New GM. In addition, the Canadian government and the new UAW Voluntary Employee Benefit Association (VEBA) will each nominate one director, bringing the total number of New GM directors to 13.

Click  here to read the entire article.

(Source:  Foreign Policy Magazine)

Cartoon Courtesy: Slate Magazine

Outside a small group of nihilists and committed free marketeers who’d have let General Motors go under, no matter the price, few question the necessity of the Obama administration’s plan for the once great American company’s reorganization in bankruptcy. But as a U.S. taxpayer, and therefore one of GM’s brand-new owners, I have my doubts about our ability to manage this new property. Yes, GM’s previous owners proved unable to run a competitive car company in a global marketplace, but is the U.S. government really the best one to transform it? Already, the particulars of the Chapter 11 arrangement lead me to fear that the same sort of internal politics, unthinking nationalism, and generalized aversion to engineering risk that have hobbled GM for decades will continue to haunt its new incarnation.

One place where you won’t hear for-attribution criticism of the “new” General Motors these days is GM headquarters. Perforce they are obligated to display their gratitude with the unfailing enthusiasm that a $50 billion-plus investment in a failing business minimally entitles its benefactors to expect in return. Although the collegial tone of the new rapprochement comes 50 years late, it is heartening nonetheless to see American industry finally welcome Washington’s involvement in matters like safety, fuel economy, and emissions regulation.

Even Robert “Maximum Bob” Lutz, GM’s outgoing product czar and vice chairman, and a fierce critic of government meddling from the “give me back my bullets” wing of Detroit’s old school, has experienced an astonishing change of heart, at the ripe age of 77. Speaking to a gathering of journalists in Motor City the other week, Lutz unhinged every jaw in the house when he shared his thoughts on how the White House automotive task force ought to become a permanent fixture. Of the unprecedented government-industry collaboration the Chrysler and GM bankruptcies begat, Lutz, an ex-Marine attack pilot and near-libertarian known for making his daily commute in a decommissioned Czech jet fighter, quipped: “Jeez, it only took 30 years for somebody to finally figure [government-industry partnership] out.”

Er, right. Thirty years and a couple of epochal bankruptcies.

Questions about the government’s intentions for the new GM Lite already abound. Notably, what will and what should the company’s policies be, now that it is controlled (in theory) by and for the benefit of U.S. taxpayers, who own 60 percent of its shares?

Will GM be underwritten so as to lead the market in the direction of fuel saving and new technologies? Or will it trim its sails and attempt to get by on its sometimes-profitable religion of pickup trucks and SUVs, perhaps ones that get slightly better mileage? GM is still tooled up to build them.

Ever since the 1920s, when GM’s Alfred P. Sloan introduced the precepts of what came to be known as Sloanism — a car for every purse and purpose — a good day at a car dealership was one when you sold someone “more car than they need.” Automobile marketing often appeals to man’s baser emotions. Greed, lust, and envy come to mind, as do excessive horsepower and other costly and unnecessary options that have been larded on to new cars to boost profits for longer than any of us have been alive. So, you can’t help wondering, has the U.S. government entered the business of encouraging people to live out their most insane automotive dreams? Will it labor to create demand for automobiles when and where there is no need, as generations of car companies have done before it?

And where do GM’s new taxpayer/shareholders stand on the matter of outsourcing work to Mexico or South Korea or China or anywhere else, as the old GM did whenever it got the chance? Will Chevy production lines in places like Toluca and Silao, Mexico, come home to the USA? The old GM went in for cheap overseas labor. Has the government now entered the business of using taxpayer money to export jobs? Is this the change we need?

Myriad practical and philosophical quandaries aside, one vital series of questions about the “new” GM — which brands will be kept, sold, or terminated — has already been answered. Chevrolet, Buick, Cadillac, GMC, Australia’s Holden, and South Korea’s Daewoo are to be spared. To be sold: Saturn, Hummer, and Sweden’s Saab are available outright, and operating control of GM’s German division, Opel, is to be sacrificed in a deal brokered by the German government outside U.S. bankruptcy proceedings. For the scrap heap: Pontiac, the venerable division that once claimed to “build excitement.” In limbo: Opel’s English sister brand, Vauxhall.

Click here to read the entire article.