|
About Me
My work has appeared in a number of major publications either as writer, photographer, or source. I enjoy talking about all things automotive. Recent Posts
Categories
Links
CarSpace Hudson's BlogAll around the car world there are stories and these are just a few of them. A new blog is posted every Monday. Sometimes more often. Feb 25, 2008 - The Shaky World of Automotive InvestingUntil around 1950, there was a Wild West-like attitude in the American automotive industry. It was a frontier to be conquered. Throughout automotive history, there have been something like 5,000 individual makers of cars and trucks in the world with about 3,500 of them being situated in the United States. Companies like General Motors, Ford, and Chrysler have survived, in one form or another, for over a century. General Motors turns 100 this year but its oldest parts (Cadillac, Buick, and the late Oldsmobile) are well over the century mark. Ford was founded in 1903. And while Chrysler was created in 1924 from the remains of Maxwell, parts of the company can be traced back to Rambler which dates back to 1903 as an automobile manufacturer. There are a few minor vehicle manufacturers in the US. The most prominent of them is Panoz which is slowly approaching its 20th anniversary. Outside of these tiny footnotes, there hasn't been a major successful American manufacturer founded since World War II. And even new import brands on US soil have been a rare find in the past 30 years. Rare successes like Hyundai and Kia are at odds with struggling Mitsubishi and soon-to-be-gone Isuzu. So you might have to forgive my apprehension everytime someone announces a new venture. When Bob Lutz announced the revival of Cunningham about eight years ago, I was excited. This was the first time in half a century that a new manufacturer would be coming to the US where I trusted the founder. Bob Lutz is the consumate car guy with REAL automotive experience working with the likes of BMW, General Motors, and Chrysler. Lutz even had novel, and as I saw it workable, approaches to manufacturing (which he laid out in two issues of Automotive Industries). But when Lutz was hired by General Motors, it was obvious that all bets on the Cunningham were off. So if Lutz prefered to take the corporate route instead of laying the foundation for real history, I knew new car production was truly a tough nut to crack. When people with questionable backgrounds talk about their automotive ventures, I automatically write them off in my head. People like Malcolm Bricklin, Gerald Weigert, and many others show great enthusiasm, some even know aspects of the automotive business, but most of them are just in business to make a quick buck. So ventures trying to tap the Chinese automakers for the next big thing find their way to my "skeptical" list. I understand that these people are trying to do what the Germans did in the late 1940s, the Japanese did in the 1960s, and the Koreans in the 1980s...catch the next big wave at its beginning. People like Max Hoffman and Kjell Qvale did just that, but the market was vastly different than it is today. The members of my list have included many different types of ventures. Importers of the ARO from Romania, the Proton from Malaysia, the TVR from the UK, the Citroen from France, the Alfa Romeo from Italy, and the Chery from China, among many others, have all announced their intentions in the past 20 years. Many times, these announcements have been followed by many different setbacks, some even could be just called frauds or scams. So it was of no surprise that Automotive News revealed that the head of one of these latest ventures was hiding a shady past. CHAMCO is a New Jersey-based importer who has announced that they plan on selling Chinese trucks in the next few years. The head spokesperson for CHAMCO has stated that he's simply a consultant for the company, but it seems that his wife is actually the chief stockholder of the company. And his past, according to the newspaper, shows that "he did time for fraud" in an earlier trucking venture that he controlled. I'm a huge car fan. I would love to see new and exciting choices in cars and trucks in the US. But each time a Build-To-Order or CHAMCO or ARO America is announced, I need to take a step back and see what's actually going on. The odds of any of these ventures getting off the ground, let alone becoming successful, are becoming smaller an
Jan 14, 2008 - The Downside of Putting the World on WheelsAs countries develop, they all seem to go through similar stages. These stages may take progress quicker or slower, depending on the country and/or culture, but they all tend to follow a similar pattern. And part of this development encompasses their automotive industry. Car companies are a sign of an economy's arrival. The US, France, Germany, and the UK all developed their automotive industries beginning in the late 1800s and other regional countries followed. As each economy develops around these car-related businesses, specific automotive needs are found and met. Trucks and buses and luxury cars are among the first. Later comes the car for the masses. The US developed their first "people's car" as the 1901 Olds but it was the 1908 Ford Model T that really set the global standard for such a vehicle. It was simple and rugged and could carry a family (or livestock) as needed. And it was inexpensive..a key component for a "people's car." France had their Citroen. England had the Austin Seven. Italy had the Fiat Topolino. Germany had the Volkswagen. Each developing nation brought their idea of the basic car to the market. In the early 1980s, India started to bloom and basic transportation was needed there. Suzuki of Japan came to India and worked with the local firm Maruti Udyog to produce a knock-off of the Japanese market small car. Maruti's little car was wildly successful in India and 20 years later, about 7 out of 1,000 people in India had a car. While 0.7% of over a billion people is still a large number, a large untapped market still remained. The global conglomerate made up of Renault and Nissan developed a little car through their Romanian subsidiary just a few years ago. The Dacia Logan introduced basic, reliable, and modern transportation to Eastern Europe in the early part of the 21st century. So well suited to the modern developing world was the Logan that it became an overnight success wherever it was introduced, including India. But the Logan was still priced high for the poorest of markets since the car was designed to be the €5,000 car; quite a bit of money in the Indian economy. Indian truck market Tata entered the car field in the 1990s with a compact car called the Indica. It was a luxury car compared to the basic Logan, but Tata had other plans. And after years of planning, Tata finally showed the fruits of their labors last week when the Tata Nano was shown to the public. And throngs of reporters rushed the stage at the car's introduction. Why would such an extremely basic car with average looks engender such a reaction? Mainly because the Nano was designed to break the Rs 1,000,000 barrier...the equivalent of $2,500! Nobody expects this little car to take over the world with its 33hp two-cylinder engine and lack of nearly every feature expected in the West. But it is the right car to take over the streets of India. For good and bad. Global oil supplies are being tapped by all of these emerging automotive markets. China is experiencing amazing growth in car production and sales. India's growth may be slower, but it's still growing at an alarming rate. And adding a basic car, albeit one that gets 50mpg, will put added pressure on the global supply of oil. It doesn't help that Americans are taxing the world's oil supply with (relatively) gas guzzling six- and eight-cylinder engines while much of the rest of the world is using four-cylinder gas and diesel engines as its primary source of power. It doesn't help when the American people see affordable gas prices as their RIGHT no matter how much they use. And it doesn't help that nobody is really doing anything to stop this demand for oil. Sure, the next generation of the automotive industry will bring about alternative fuels, but we've been waiting for that to be "right around the corner" since the early 1970s. Car companies have been working on fuel cell vehicles since the 1960s and electric vehicles since before 1900, but we're not going to see these (or any other alternative fueled vehicles) anytime soon. Between necessary infrastructure change for fueling these vehicles that nobody's funding to a significant lack of desire by car and oil companies and government agencies to push these new technologies, we'll be lucky to see any of these new vehicles hitting mass market prices before oil prices reach $200 a barrel...or more. I want to remove myself from the problem, but I can't afford to. My best move reduce my intake of oil as radically as possible. I hope to have my 100mpg moped available for my daily commute by spring time. On bad weather days and when the seasons change, I'll be back to my 25mpg sedan. Part of me wants the people of India to enjoy the thrill of driving their own car. Part of me wants Tata to drop the whole Nano project right now to limit the number of potential drivers further eating away at the finite petroleum resources available. I'm torn. But there are thousands of Indians, right now, anxious to get their hands on their first new car. Many of them ready to bring cash to a Tata dealer for a car that won't be availble until the fall. I'm happy for them...but sad for every car owner (and potential car owner) around the world.
Aug 6, 2007 - Should They Stay or Should They Go?On one automotive forum that I frequent, there is a discussion of which car brands should be the next to leave the US market. Poster after poster lists their choices and the reasons why they believe each should no longer sell their wares in the US. Most of the opinions are based on biases formed from personal experiences with these brands…some of which are quite out-dated. But it’s an interesting discussion. My opinion, as a car fanatic, is that more is better than less. I’m an American and proud of it. I wish American manufacturers were not losing market share to the imports, but it’s not, in my opinion, completely undeserved. But I would not want any brands to go away to simply save a domestic brand name (domestic jobs, however, are another topic for another time). With the Chinese brands knocking at the door, this discussion takes on added fervor. Many of the people involved in this discussion believe that the Chinese are the next wave of automotive competition to beat up the American companies, and I have to agree. Where the Japanese were laughed at just 40 years ago, today they’re among the most admired automotive manufacturers in the world. The Korean brands were in the same boat just 25 years ago and today Hyundai and Kia are respectable names in many parts of the world. Along with a few Indian companies, Chinese companies are looking to the US for market expansion. Many people have heard of Chery since they have been in the news for the past few years while they prepare to enter the US market. Today, Chrysler is working with Chery to produce an entry-level Dodge product for the US market. And Chery will take what they learn from Chrysler to become a global brand on their own. There’s also Nanjing and Shanghai and Great Wall and Geely and a dozen others that are looking across the Pacific. Nanjing owns the MG brand and will, most likely, use that name in its global expansion. Shanghai has been working with Volkswagen and General Motors for a number of years to increase their hold on the Chinese market, but exports aren’t too far away especially since they bought out the Rover side of the former MG Rover company, but need to establish their own brand name (they’re currently using Roewe, almost pronounced “wrong way”) since the Rover name did not come with the package. Great Wall has light trucks and Geely has economy cars and both have eyes on the US market. Brilliance and Wuling and Landwind could be in the next wave as well. But, from what I’ve seen, none of these companies are ready for the US market quite yet. The Japanese entered the US market with cars too small for American tastes but quickly tailored their products with US buyers in mind…and raised their quality to class-leading levels. The Koreans learned from the mistakes made by the Japanese and brought true entry-level product to the US. Although they made their own mistakes along the way, they were competitive players in just over 25 years from producing their first car (the Japanese took about 40 years. The Chinese seem like they’re on the 20 year plan, which would bring them to a competitive nature in just a few more years. Once in a while, one of my cars impresses someone. It doesn’t happen very often, but it’s a nice feeling that someone likes your choice of car. The only person who really matters about my choice of car is me. And that’s how it should be with everyone’s choice. The fact that I don’t care for a single guy buying a Ford SuperDuty just to commute to his office doesn’t matter as long as the owner of that big pickup likes his choice. This laissez faire attitude should extend to brand names as well. If Isuzu finds enough buyers for their products, more power to them…it’s a capitalist marketplace. Not too many would be sad to see Isuzu (or Mitsubishi or Suzuki or Buick or Mercury or…) go, but the reduction in choice would be a sad thing. So here’s hoping that we see a return of Alfa Romeo (discussed for a year or two from now), Citroen and Peugeot (oft-rumored), Fiat, and MG. Perhaps then the Americans can bring back Duesenberg and Packard and Stutz and AMC and Edsel and… Okay, maybe I've gone a bit too far.
|
