“…fritter and waste the hours in an off-hand way”

Straw men are easy to construct and even easier to knock down. That’s really the idea isn’t it? Create a fake issue, then counter it, voila! Your argument is made and won, all in the same breath.

So it goes with Marty Padgett’s piece on carconnection, “Why Detroit Isn’t The “New” New Orleans“.

I was directed to this piece by John Voelcker, an associate of Padgett’s. I’ve read, argued with and agreed with John’s writing for years. Basically, John is a good guy and so, I am sure, is Mr. Padgett. Which leaves me wondering, what was the impetus for carconnection to deliver what’s really a flame at the people of Detroit. Was it really one sentence in some Jalopnik piece? And how many sentient beings out of their teens really take Jalopnik seriously about anything?

Let’s start with the straw man. Padgett writes…

They’re both withered and pretty much defenseless–but does that mean Detroit is the new New Orleans? Does it deserve some kind of federal intervention? Here’s what our colleague, Jalopnik editor @RayWert says:

“Detroit’s New Orleans-like loss of population received no telethons or FEMA assistance. America doesn’t care about Detroit people.”

About what I would expect from Jalopnik. And Padgett deftly explains that no, you don’t get FEMA assistance for the kind of slow burn economic disaster that’s befallen Detroit for the last two decades (or more). That’s obvious. And without reading the Gawker piece (after years of wasting my time, I just don’t bother giving Nick Denton the click) I can’t really further delve into why Wert wrote what he did. Nor do I care to. I’m much more interested in what Padgett wrote for his site.

My argument with Padgett begins here:

And yet Detroit got cash anyway. The city and its suburbs–via automakers and by extensions, suppliers, employees, and dependents–received billions in bailout loans in 2009 that probably prevented the city’s head count from falling twice as far.

We have to parse this one carefully to really see the folly contained inside. On the exterior, it seems to a reasonable, common sense remark but it isn’t and here’s why.

“Detroit” didn’t get the “cash”. GM, Chrysler and Ford have been getting the cash. The difference is enormous. That, for the most part, GM, Chrysler and Ford care really care less about Detroit and the other former locations where they once made cars is self-evident. In the rush to “stay competitive” the big three have off-shored as much production as they possibly can ignoring any tie to the communities left behind in the desolation.

Then Padgett drops the trickle down bomb, “The city and its suburbs–via automakers and by extensions, suppliers, employees, and dependents–received billions” but it’s a weapon of misdirection. Again, the people of Detroit, the city of Detroit didn’t get this money. The automakers who have become pseudonymous with the city they once built cars in got the cash. Some of that federal largesse went to facilities in Detroit, much of it, arguably most of it, did not. None of it went to the people of Detroit or the city of Detroit to help them grapple with the problems they face.

Padgett continues…

That doesn’t even begin to account for the ongoing subsidies Detroit gets indirectly from federal programs for investing in green-car technology and in sub-federal money that keeps factories alive when they probably weren’t viable on their own account.

Again, the difference between the city receiving monies and the car companies, two thirds of which are now located the suburbs surrounding the city, cashing in is enormous. In many cases the big three have invested that subsidy money, as they have to, domestically. Have that money been spent in Detroit? No, not in its entirety by any means.

As for factories that “weren’t viable on their account” who is to blame for that? The people of Detroit? Are they somehow less productive employees than other places? Or maybe it’s the city of Detroit, maybe the city itself is to blame? I think the blame for the viability of factories rests solidly, but not solely, on the car companies, their managers and executives. Those same executives, by the way, who have been real benefactors of the government bailouts Padgett mentions. Those execs have been collecting their salaries and bonuses while their former factories decayed and their business models were invalidated. Blaming it on the city or on the employees isn’t just wrong, it’s malicious.

Padgett continues to erect straw creations for ceremonial burning…

The second point’s much worse. “America doesn’t care about Detroit people” is political plutonium.

And then he launches into some sideways thing about George Bush. Look, honestly, America doesn’t much care about Detroit any more than it cares about Wilkes-Barre, Cleveland, Gary, Pittsburgh, Rochester, South Bend, Flint or Milwaukee (to name just a few cities). America, passively or otherwise seems to be pretty comfortable allowing the industrial part of our economy to wither and die only to be replaced by the service economy, yes, a nation of fast food and hotel employees. I don’t want to get off track and dig into the politics of all of that but I do think it bear mentioning that if we, as a nation, cared about this sector of the economy and the cities and states that depended on it, we might have talked about building other things or modifying the ways we build things here. Instead, most of us were perfectly content to encourage and subsidize the big three to move as much manufacturing out of this country as possible. If that is “caring” I’ll take apathy.

It’s inflammatory, much like the Jalopnik post that inspired Padgett to write what he did but I do think there is something valid in the comparison. Not a direct one to one comparison, life and reality is seldom that simple. But as a metaphor things like the image below help us see things differently. They force to re-evaluate the so odiously misnamed common wisdom and perhaps, see more truth than we did before. This is one of the first page of Michael Moore‘s 1996 book, “Downsize This!”

The top image is the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City that was bombed by Timothy McVeigh. The lower image is a closed factory in Flint. Before you dismiss the comparison, again, not a direct one, consider the following. The Murrah tragedy was the act of one man intentionally trying to destroy federal property and maim and kill. The second image, the Flint factory was the direct result of auto executives making intentional decisions to close a local factory, fire workers there and demolish the building. They’re not the same acts by any means but the point Moore makes in his book is simple and obvious, both acts had much the same results. Lives were ended prematurely. Families were destroyed. Communities were devastated. Was this the fault of those workers? Were they just not good enough? Did they deserve what they got?

In his second to last paragraph Padgett blames Detroit’s ills on, “the unions, and an overbearing, overburdened city government”. Notice what’s missing?

Padgett won’t get an argument from me that some unions have, at times, been out of control. But it’s difficult to blame the big three’s ills on the unions, after all, did the big three also sign onto all those contracts? If those contracts are burdensome or badly negotiated, why did they agree to them?

And Detroit’s civis issues have been well publicized. Their laughable civic government is, well, laughable. And not defend them but allow me to add this. Anyone who has ever run a business can understand this. A growing business is one that is typically much more simple to manage than one that is shrinking. Detroit has been a basket for a long time because of an ever more eroding tax base, and ever increasing burden of costs associated with managing a shrinking economy. For anyone, even the best of civic leaders, Detroit would be a serious challenge.

And ponder this for a moment, what’s been run worse? The city of Detroit, with no federal help and a shrinking economy or the big three car companies with tons of federal assistance and a mandate from the government that they are too big to fail?

Padgett closes with the follow…

New Orleans has levees. Detroit has denial. They’re both Achilles’ heels, but one doesn’t have to be.

Wow, game, set, match. If only Detroit would just pick itself up by its rusty bootstraps and be a real city, it wouldn’t be losing population at a ridiculous rate, turning over entire blocks into improvised gardens and still be host to innumerable empty factories, homes and offices.

I would say that there is some serious denial taking place but it isn’t on Detroit’s part. No, it’s denial from those of us who think that a city devastated by outsourcing, rampant with private enterprise management as malfaisant as the very worst of its civic mishandlers, can just bounce back with a good attitude and the power of positive thinking. Detroit, as a place full of people, is emblematic of the what’s happened to once vibrant middle class this country had. And we ignore that lesson at our own peril.

My note: The title of this piece is, obviously, a line from Pink Floyd’s “Time” which, for some reason I only half understand, was resonating in my head while I wrote this. -russell

What Drives Us Episode #5 for the week of February 17th, 2010

Play the latest What Drives Us episode

This week Danny and Russell joined by Tony Schaefer to discuss, sorry, more on the Toyota recall, ton foil hat conspiracies, why does “sudden acceleration” occur (hint: it has to do with the gas pedal), more on the Nissan Leaf and the return of Maximum Bob Lutz, GM’s prognosticator supreme. We also pass along our most sincere sympathies to the families and staff of Tesla Motors for the tragic loss of three of their engineers in a terrible plane accident.

Download it through iTunes here.

Reuters says Toyota will announce Prius recall tonight

This article from Reuters says Toyota will file a recall notice at 420 GMT (about twenty minutes from now) on the 2010 Prius. Mentioned also was the Lexus HS250h.

Toyota said President Akio Toyoda and Executive Vice President Shinichi Sasaki, in charge of quality, would hold a media briefing at 3:30 p.m. (0630 GMT) in Tokyo regarding the recall.

It will file a recall of the 2010 Prius, the world’s best-selling hybrid car, “and other models” at Japan’s transport ministry at 1:30 p.m. (0430 GMT), a spokeswoman said. Details will be announced at 2 p.m. (0500 GMT).

The article mentions that the Kelly Blue Book is cutting used Prius values by 1.5 percent “on concerns around the growing supply of unsold Toyotas on both dealer lots and at auctions.”

Bad Influence

One way to find out what will not be happening in the consumer trends for just about anything is to listen or read “industry analysts”. I tend read a lot of this stuff and I’m astonished at how often these people can be staggeringly wrong and go on to make fourteen new predictions the next week as though they’ve never stumbled.

Here’s a piece from the Detroit Free Press on why EV’s will continue to be a very small niche product until at least 2020 according to the Boston Consulting Group. BCG is a gun for hire, management consulting company. The obvious question here is, who’s paying for this study?

Curiously enough, there was an interesting link in the Free Press story by Justin Hyde, this blog post from, of all places, gm-volt.com, says that the Mini-E chokes in the cold, badly. I’m somewhat surprised to hear this but this is exactly companies test prototypes before going to production.

According to the writer of the gm-volt.com blog post, who is testing of the Mini-E’s, not only are the batteries battered by the cold but the driving performance in snow and ice renders the car almost unusable. The writer admits he hasn’t followed BMW’s recommendation to change the all-season tires to snow tires however.

Responding

John Voelcker from Green Car Reports was kind enough to respond in comments below to this POG piece. I wanted to republish it on the front page, as it were, because I thought it was a great response and deserved better billing than the comments section.

Russell: Thanks for the good words. All of the questions in your last paragraph are very apt, and many of us will ask them as the cars get closer to the hands of actual drivers.

As for your comment on my closing question, I could probably have phrased it better. Here’s the point I was trying to get to …

Both cars are plug-ins, and hence will be perceived as “electric cars”. That is, users will expect them to run in electric mode some or most of the time.

From talking to Toyota and GM tech folks, I gather the Prius Plug-In may start its engine under many circumstances: Heavy load, full acceleration, a catalyst that’s cooling down, cold weather, and so forth. It remains fundamentally a power-split hybrid with a larger battery, and operates as such.

On the other hand, the Volt engineers tell me it switches on the engine only under one circumstance: The pack is depleted, which they say occurs only after 40 miles. (It may also fire the engine to start the car in extremely cold weather; must ask about that.)

SO, my question might better be: Will plug-in buyers expect continuous electric running for the stated range (12 or 40 miles)? If they do, I suspect the Prius Plug-In may have a perceptual problem, because it may well not run all-electric for 12 continuous miles. If not, no problem.

In either case, GM and Toyota are likely to be sold out of their first couple of years of production.

It’s in 2014 and after, as volume rises, that they’ll actually have to start to market these guys. That’s when it’ll get interesting!

The real cipher here is the Volt. As I said below, the Prius is a known quantity and, as John points out, perhaps the potential weakness of the Prius PHEV is that it is a Prius and not a brand new, designed from the ground up PHEV. Over the last couple years I’ve said the same thing here several times. While I love the Prius and can’t wait to see the Prius PHEV, I would prefer to see a brand new, designed to be nothing but a PHEV vehicle from Toyota. I think a PHEV should be smaller and lighter than the Prius (more range, better performance). I question whether or not the Prius is the ideal platform for a PHEV given where battery development is right now. All that is moot because this year Prius PHEV testing will begin.

Back to what John said…

I don’t know what the public perceptions of the PHEVs will be. None of us do (as John points out). It will be interesting to see if the Prius’ hybrid PHEV suffers in competition to the Chevy’s take on the PHEV concept. One thing both cars seem to insist on is that gas powered motors augment a pure EV concept for extended range.

I still think that two huge things give Toyota a leg up on producing a real PHEV. One, is using an existing, proven platform. For whatever drawbacks there are to using the Prius platform, there are also huge advantages and, let’s face it, Chevy’s been blowing smoke about the Volt for what, three years now? It’s still a mostly mythical car whereas the Prius is very real. Toyota has established itself in this altcars genre and I think that for every person who wants to buy a bowtie because it is a bowtie, there are just as many people who want the implied reliability and sound engineering that goes with the Toyota name.

John Voelcker wrote:

SO, my question might better be: Will plug-in buyers expect continuous electric running for the stated range (12 or 40 miles)? If they do, I suspect the Prius Plug-In may have a perceptual problem, because it may well not run all-electric for 12 continuous miles. If not, no problem.

My take on it is this, I don’t think consumers are going to care, too much, about how the ICE interacts in either vehicle. What will drive consumer reaction to the Prius PHEV and the Chevy Volt are the basics, MPG, ease of use, comfort, price, reliability. I don’t think that consumers will care overmuch about when the ICE starts and stops as long as it delivers on the PHEV potential of using very little gasoline. I could be wrong and if so, here are my words for future embarrassment but I don’t think I’ll be bummed out by what I’ve written in a few years.

My thanks to John Voelcker for taking the time to read my original article and add his thoughts to it.

The Good and the Silly

Like financial sites reporting on the auto biz, it’s always a little scary when gadget sites start talking about cars. Engadget is one of the better sites for electronics geekery but I ran across this article this morning and stopped for second because of the lead in:

As Tesla continues on its commendable journey to surpass Ford, GM, Toyota and everyone else in total sales, it’s evidently hoping a tie-up with Panasonic will help it accomplish said goal.

That’s a very long journey my engadgety friends. Tesla is still, very much, the struggling startup and for good reason, their cheapest offering is now nearly $50k. Given that the only other vehicle they make sells for over $100k, it’s not likely anyone at Ford, GM, Toyota, Kia, Hyundai, Dae Woo, Suzuki, Nissan, Fiat, BMW, Volkswagen, or even the folks at Chrysler are going to be worried about seeing Tesla in their corporate rear view mirrors. I suppose I take umbrage at the idea that Tesla is even in the same league with Ford, GM and Toyota. They’re not and it’s bloody unlikely they ever will be.

Now, Tesla’s leading edge attempt at creating all electric car is certainly helping to push EV development but it would push those companies a lot harder if they actually developed, say a $25K EV. Taking the EV out of the realm of the high-priced niche would be a great goal, a goal which, I do not think, Tesla is really positioned to do.

Enough of that, on to the point of the article which is:

The two outfits have just agreed to work together in order to develop next-generation battery packs to be used within electric vehicles, which are based around “Nickel-based Lithium ion chemistry.”

Which is exciting especially if it leads to something practical.

Slappin’ the bowtie

Here’s the money line from this story in the New York Times.

“No one is going to pay a $15,000 premium for a car that competes with a Corolla. So there are not enough idiots who will buy it.”

Those were the words of Johan de Nysschen, the president of Audi of America, who recently spoke (quite candidly) to Lawrence Ulrich of MSN Autos about the Chevrolet Volt.

And for those of you who think that’s harsh, here’s the reality of it. I went to Toyota.com and tried to build a $25K Corolla. Go give it a try. By adding, quite literally, everything Toyota sells for that car, from custom door sills to the ashtray, I got the Corolla to $23,508.

So yes, the $15K premium is a polite minimum.

And with all that said, if, and this is one big “if”, if the Volt can do what GM is claiming, I still think it’s a good thing. Maybe once GM has climbed this mountain they can bring the cost down. But those are big ifs.

And frankly, after spending a week in what is essentially GM’s lead mid-size sedan, the Impala, I have to tell you, they have a lot of work to do. Compared to the Prius, the Impala is vastly inferior vehicle in just about every measure.

Time will tell.

And let me add one more thing. I drove the Ford Fusion at Green Drive Expo in Madison last month. It’s not a bad car. Don’t get me wrong, I wouldn’t even ponder trading in my Prius for a Fusion hybrid but it’s a bad option and I’m glad there are options out there for consumers to consider. But let’s extend this drama out a year or so. We may have another one or two hybrids from Toyota. Possibly some others from other companies. We’ll have a Fusion hybrid that’s already had a year or more under its belt. And then comes the Volt. That’s worse than a tough place to come from especially when your vehicle costs significantly more than all the others.

Calling the Volt a longshot is being more than polite or optimistic. It might just be fantasy.

Want to know why GM is sinking?

I can tell you why. I’m driving 2010 Chevy Impala while my Prius is in the shop. Talk about a totally different driving experience. There’s no comparison, none, to my Prius, either the 2005 GII or my new 2010 GIII.

I’ll post some specifics later but seriously, this car is terrible.

High Voltage

Right now there is a lot talk about the Volt. With a provisional “MPG rating” of 230 MPG, there is no doubt GM will crank the hype machine into high gear. It’s really what the Volt project has been about, created positive publicity for GM.

One thing is clear to me, GM is still floundering, badly, with poor management, in whatever random direction seems to work at the moment.

This is great little piece which highlights one small problem with GM, promising more than they can deliver. At this point we don’t know exactly how the production Volt will perform. But GM is sure that talking about 230 MPG is the right thing to do.

It’s arguable that plug-ins should not be measured in MPG at all. BusinessWeek’s Ed Wallace argued the same thing here. Consumers need a touchstone, something to compare one vehicle to another but MPG on a plug-in a dangerous guide but MPG usefulness may have jumped the shark. With Nissan claiming 367MPG for it’s all electric Leaf, we see the ridiculous get downright insane. Yes, that’s right. Nissan is claiming their all electric vehicle will get 367MPG (or the equivalent of it) even though it will never use an ounce of gas. Wallace also points out that over-promised and under-delivering has been about the only thing GM has been good at it and it’s never helped them in the past and it won’t help them here.

And then, we still have far too much of the media trying to reduce issues where they shouldn’t be reducing. Here’s CNN/Money‘s latest travesty, it’s about which car makes sense, the Prius or the Volt. Funny, comparing a car that’s been out for a decade to one that doesn’t exist yet. Seems like an odd thing to do. And of course, being CNN/Money, they try, once more, to go down the “which car makes sense based on gasoline costs” which is odd for numerous reasons I’ve pointed out here again and again. CNN/Money dabbles in the typical comparing the Prius to a standard gas car half its size, to try to make the math make sense. I guess that’s why I was an art major.

Head, meet desk. Let the pounding commence.

What’s more, the work that Toyota and to a lesser extent, Honda have done in delivering reliable, long-lasting battery electric hybrids could be undone by a spectacular failure of the Volt’s (or the Leaf’s) battery pack. Batteries are still a huge question in most consumer’s minds even though the Prius has been on the road for a decade now. Add in a nationwide, media saturated, Volt flame out and we could see a backlash against any car with more parts more comlpex than fuel injection. That would be sad but it could happen.

Bloomberg, wrong again

Bloomberg hears from, “two people familiar with the plan” that Toyota is considering producing the Prius at the Nummi plant near Oakland, California. This rumor pops up about once a year and with the added flavor of GM’s bankruptcy (Nummi is joint venture between Toyota and GM currently producing the Vibe which, not coincidentally, is scheduled to end production next year) is especially appealing to hungry news organs. I don’t have any inside information other than I’ll take Toyota at their word that they will build the Prius at the Mississippi plant once sales merit.

And then oops, via Reuters this morning comes an official denial from Toyota that they are considering building the Prius at Nummi.

So much for Bloomberg.

Bringing teh stoopid

Check out these choice quotes from John Helig of the Auto Page in his review of the Ford Fusion. Apparently, the coolest thing about the Fusion is, it doesn’t look like the Prius. Mission accomplished Ford!

Toyota’s Prius is, arguably, the most successful hybrid. But it, too, looks slightly strange. You know one when you see one, and the owners all have these smug looks on their faces as if to say “I’m special. Look what I’m doing for the environment.” The fact that one-passenger Priuses can go in HOV-2 lanes doesn’t hurt either.

“Arguably”? It is. There’s really no question on this. The sales figures are pretty simple here. As Jim Rome says, “scoreboard”.

And the whole, tired South Park dig, just tired.

The Prius is good for 35-40 mpg in normal driving, but the rear seat is still compact-car size, which isn’t fun for senior citizens.

One has to wonder if Helig has ever driven or been in a Prius. The Prius isn’t a “compact” car by any rational standards and the back seat certainly isn’t small for most senior citizens, at least senior citizens under seven feet tall and 600 pounds.

But there are those of us who aren’t looking for sainthood and expecting “normal car” drivers to bow down to us as we pass. While we appreciate the virtues of hybrids, we don’t necessarily like the sacrifices we’re asked to make.

Yeah, I was thinking about this yesterday as I was driving down the road, sunroof open, relaxing in my leather seats, blasting the stereo. Wow, the sacrifices I have to make just to make a cheap grab for sainthood. Well, enough of that woolgathering. Now it’s time to practice my intimidating smug face.

In the end, I think it’s funny that the first three paragraphs of a review on the Ford Fusion are a diatribe aimed at the most popular hybrid in the world and on its owners. Good luck with that appraoch Mr. Helig. I’ll GM’s PR department has a position just waiting for you with mad skillz like that.

GM kills Malibu hybrid

Mild hybrid dies quiet death in bankrupt company. No film at eleven.

But if you want to read more about it, go here.