Cash for clunkers over?

[zman1]

Cash for clunkers over?
It's a sad testament. The money borrowed to run the program netted a big win for automakers. Unfortunately, the big winners were foreign again, as in every industry, where two thirds of the automaker's profits end up - Their motherland... Borrowed money, so we could send it to Japan and Korea

Why invest in the land of the free and home of the brave... When the land of the Rising Sun or The Land of the Morning Calm sounds so much cooler..
Top 10 New Vehicles Purchased
1. Toyota Corolla
2. Honda Civic
3. Toyota Camry
4. Ford Focus FWD
5. Hyundai Elantra
6. Nissan Versa
7. Toyota Prius
8. Honda Accord
9. Honda Fit
10. Ford Escape FWD
Top 10 Trade-in Vehicles
1. Ford Explorer 4WD
2. Ford F150 Pickup 2WD
3. Jeep Grand Cherokee 4WD
4. Ford Explorer 2WD
5. Dodge Caravan/Grand Caravan 2WD
6. Jeep Cherokee 4WD
7. Chevrolet Blazer 4WD
8. Chevrolet C1500 Pickup 2WD
9. Ford F150 Pickup 4WD
10. Ford Windstar FWD Van

 

[aquaknight]

Don't believe the government's list for a second. The government uses a more arcane measurement method that subdivides models according to engine and transmission types, counting them as separate models. For example, the Ford Escape is available in six different versions including two- and four-wheel drive and hybrid versions. The government counts each version as a different vehicle using guidelines from the Environmental Protection Agency. Only the front wheel drive, non-hybrid version made the government's top ten list.
Here are the real lists, which look a ton better.
Top 10 Cars bought under CARS program;
1 Ford Escape
2 Ford Focus
3 Jeep Patriot
4 Dodge Caliber
5 Ford F-150
6 Honda Civic
7 Chevrolet Silverado
8 Chevrolet Cobalt
9 Toyota Corolla
10 Ford Fusion
Top 10 cars traded In;
1 Ford F-150
2 Ford Explorer
3 Jeep Grand Cherokee
4 Chevrolet C/K 1500 sires (Silverado)
5 Dodge Ram Pickup 1500
6 Jeep Cherokee
7 Ford Windstar
8 Chevrolet Blazer
9 Dodge Grand Caravan
10 Ford Ranger
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cash_for_clunkers

 

[reefraff]

Originally Posted by AquaKnight
http:///forum/post/3122320
Don't believe the government's list for a second. The government uses a more arcane measurement method that subdivides models according to engine and transmission types, counting them as separate models. For example, the Ford Escape is available in six different versions including two- and four-wheel drive and hybrid versions. The government counts each version as a different vehicle using guidelines from the Environmental Protection Agency. Only the front wheel drive, non-hybrid version made the government's top ten list.
Here are the real lists, which look a ton better.
Top 10 Cars bought under CARS program;
1 Ford Escape
2 Ford Focus
3 Jeep Patriot
4 Dodge Caliber
5 Ford F-150
6 Honda Civic
7 Chevrolet Silverado
8 Chevrolet Cobalt
9 Toyota Corolla
10 Ford Fusion
Top 10 cars traded In;
1 Ford F-150
2 Ford Explorer
3 Jeep Grand Cherokee
4 Chevrolet C/K 1500 sires (Silverado)
5 Dodge Ram Pickup 1500
6 Jeep Cherokee
7 Ford Windstar
8 Chevrolet Blazer
9 Dodge Grand Caravan
10 Ford Ranger
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cash_for_clunkers
According to the governments figures 39% of the cars bought under cash for clunkers were made by the michigan mafia. The rest were foreign brands. Really good program

 

[aquaknight]

That's the thing, government numbers. I know the program is suppose to help domestic manufactures, but I think the issue is more people bought trucks then the government wants to admit. They claim the average mpg of the cars bought is 25.4mpg, but if you factor in all those Silverado's and F-150 bought, the number should be much lower. I think the gov't fears more that the program failed the environment, then the manufactures %%. So if you factor in all those econo-boxes, Corollas, Camry, Civics, instead, that helps the mpg claims.
Also factor that the domestic's only normally have about a 45% market share. So if 39% is really correct, it's not as lower as 39% seems. Don't forget there's cars from Britian and Germany too. Early on, the domestics had a 47% share.
http://www.leftlanenews.com/big-thre...rs-buyers.html

 

[sepulatian]

I went to small shops looking for a deal on a used car... This cash for clunkers is KILLING the smaller places. OMG... I didn't realize how bad it was until I saw the owners. One guy was talking all about it. His used stuff was so over priced for what it was. He told us that he can't even get a good deal at an auction anymore because every other used place is competing for the same small amount of used cars... It is terrible!!! I can't afford a new car right now. For the price of used, I may as well just buy new, which I personaly think is the point of this BS progam... Disgusting...

 

[aquaknight]

Originally Posted by sepulatian
http:///forum/post/3122390
I went to small shops looking for a deal on a used car... This cash for clunkers is KILLING the smaller places. OMG... I didn't realize how bad it was until I saw the owners. One guy was talking all about it. His used stuff was so over priced for what it was. He told us that he can't even get a good deal at an auction anymore because every other used place is competing for the same small amount of used cars... It is terrible!!! I can't afford a new car right now. For the price of used, I may as well just buy new, which I personaly think is the point of this BS progam... Disgusting...
Indeed, this is probably the largest and nastiest side effect of the whole CARS program. The thing is due to the economy, before CARS, the used car market has definitely slide down. Cars previously worth $7500 or now worth maybe $4000. The main catch is that people who are driving the true multi-colored body panel clunkers, aren't going to be able to new cars anyway. So really the people using the CARS program are trading in their old daily drivers, which aren't in terrible shape, just not worth more then the $3500/$4500 the gov't is handing out. So the dealers aren't getting <$4500 cars anymore, so they have to make more profit on >$4500 cars, effectively pricing out a percentage of the population which can't afford a new car, was looking used, but their aren't anymore.

 

[reefraff]

Originally Posted by AquaKnight
http:///forum/post/3122383
That's the thing, government numbers. I know the program is suppose to help domestic manufactures, but I think the issue is more people bought trucks then the government wants to admit. They claim the average mpg of the cars bought is 25.4mpg, but if you factor in all those Silverado's and F-150 bought, the number should be much lower. I think the gov't fears more that the program failed the environment, then the manufactures

. So if you factor in all those econo-boxes, Corollas, Camry, Civics, instead, that helps the mpg claims.
Also factor that the domestic's only normally have about a 45% market share. So if 39% is really correct, it's not as lower as 39% seems. Don't forget there's cars from Britian and Germany too. Early on, the domestics had a 47% share.
http://www.leftlanenews.com/big-thre...rs-buyers.html
Wanna bet? About 70% of the cars traded in (73% I think it was) were from Detroit. Look at the trade in list. In other words if 100 cars were traded in 70 were from Detroit makers but only 39 bought another domestic brand so the US companies lost better than 30% of their market share of those people who participated. The US makers are going to lose on this in the long run.

 

[sepulatian]

Originally Posted by AquaKnight
http:///forum/post/3122400
Indeed, this is probably the largest and nastiest side effect of the whole CARS program. The thing is due to the economy, before CARS, the used car market has definitely slide down. Cars previously worth $7500 or now worth maybe $4000. The main catch is that people who are driving the true multi-colored body panel clunkers, aren't going to be able to new cars anyway. So really the people using the CARS program are trading in their old daily drivers, which aren't in terrible shape, just not worth more then the $3500/$4500 the gov't is handing out. So the dealers aren't getting <$4500 cars anymore, so they have to make more profit on >$4500 cars, effectively pricing out a percentage of the population which can't afford a new car, was looking used, but their aren't anymore.
The government bought up all of the used cars that "qualify" for the cash for clunkers... I don't know what you are trying to say but it drove UP the used car prices. The cars were crushed.. not sold to used lots... Used lots have to now compete for crap to stay in business...

 

[aquaknight]

Originally Posted by reefraff
http:///forum/post/3122402
Wanna bet? About 70&#37; of the cars traded in (73% I think it was) were from Detroit. Look at the trade in list. In other words if 100 cars were traded in 70 were from Detroit makers but only 39 bought another domestic brand so the US companies lost better than 30% of their market share of those people who participated. The US makers are going to lose on this in the long run.
It's not an apples to apples comparison. You can't compare the market segments the domestics had in the early 90's (most of these trade-ins) to what that the results of program is today. The fact of the matter is that before the CARS program, domestics only accounted for 45% of the market. I don't think 39% is that bad, given the fact the CARS program is aimed to get more fuel efficient cars on the road, which sadly, many still don't attribute domestics with.
There's also the fact, how many of the 1994 Explorer's or 95 Rams are being traded in from original owners? The majority of these older SUV's/trucks, if I had to guess, are from 2nd owners. Which obviously don't matter to manufactures anyways.
Originally Posted by sepulatian
http:///forum/post/3122411
The government bought up all of the used cars that "qualify" for the cash for clunkers... I don't know what you are trying to say but it drove UP the used car prices. The cars were crushed.. not sold to used lots... Used lots have to now compete for crap to stay in business...
Just basically saying what your saying

. Without the cheap cars, the dealers have to make more on the more expensive cars.
The cars aren't being crushed, to speak. The dealers are destroying the engines, then they're going to junkyards to be striped of usable parts.

 

[reefraff]

Originally Posted by AquaKnight
http:///forum/post/3122423
It's not an apples to apples comparison. You can't compare the market segments the domestics had in the early 90's (most of these trade-ins) to what that the results of program is today. The fact of the matter is that before the CARS program, domestics only accounted for 45% of the market. I don't think 39% is that bad, given the fact the CARS program is aimed to get more fuel efficient cars on the road, which sadly, many still don't attribute domestics with.
There's also the fact, how many of the 1994 Explorer's or 95 Rams are being traded in from original owners? The majority of these older SUV's/trucks, if I had to guess, are from 2nd owners. Which obviously don't matter to manufactures anyways.
Just basically saying what your saying

. Without the cheap cars, the dealers have to make more on the more expensive cars.
The cars aren't being crushed, to speak. The dealers are destroying the engines, then they're going to junkyards to be striped of usable parts.

Think about it, the program gave incentives for people driving lower mileage cars, typically domestic, to buy higher mileage cars which are typically the foreign brands. Had the program had 45% domestics traded in and 39% purchased your assumption would be correct. But that isn't the case. While the domestics may have 45% of the market share they made up over 70% of those participating in the program. They would have needed to have 70+ percent of the sales just to keep even.
Even assuming your premise the domestic brands only lost 6% of market share of those that bought during the program was correct the program was an utter failure. We the taxpayers subsidized the profits for foreign corporations in 61% of the transactions.

 

[kingsmith]

Well I am certainly enjoying my new 09 Accord, buts its true I neverwould have bought new, however 3,500 for a car I got for free and would have had to put acouple of grand into or trade in for next to nothing hey cann't complain

 

[darthtang aw]

The other factor no one is thinking about is this. This program prematurely hgad people trading in and buying new cars. Many for the cost of a used car. This is great for the consumer. But bad for business as a whole. The car manufactures just had their sales falsely boosted. Now that many people own a new car..(many instead of a used car) how long before they buy again. You just effectively ruined the auto industry for the long run. NOW not as many people will be looking to buy a new car in the future. They have one they can drive for the next 5-10 years.....
Basically what I am saying, this program did very little environmentally when compared to the grand scheme of things. the market stimulation is very short lived and the long term effects will hurt the auto industry more than help.
And factor in the effect this will have on the car parts market. With people buying new cars at used car prices, the auto parts market will surely see a decline.

 

[lovethesea]

We noticed that since we are looking for a low miles used Impala (08-09) that some sales people didn't really want to give us any time. We won't be trading as we are looking for another vehicle with better gas mileage for my hubby's upcoming longer commute to work. We will be keeping his existing vehicle because we know the car is cared for and we need the 3rd car.
It was just interesting to see that trend while the CARS program was in effect. I guess we can resume our search
Now next clunkers on tap???? Appliances!!!

 

[jp30338]

Originally Posted by zman1
http:///forum/post/3122303
Cash for clunkers over?
It's a sad testament. The money borrowed to run the program netted a big win for automakers. Unfortunately, the big winners were foreign again, as in every industry, where two thirds of the automaker's profits end up - Their motherland... Borrowed money, so we could send it to Japan and Korea

Why invest in the land of the free and home of the brave... When the land of the Rising Sun or The Land of the Morning Calm sounds so much cooler..
Top 10 New Vehicles Purchased
1. Toyota Corolla
2. Honda Civic
3. Toyota Camry
4. Ford Focus FWD
5. Hyundai Elantra
6. Nissan Versa
7. Toyota Prius
8. Honda Accord
9. Honda Fit
10. Ford Escape FWD
Top 10 Trade-in Vehicles
1. Ford Explorer 4WD
2. Ford F150 Pickup 2WD
3. Jeep Grand Cherokee 4WD
4. Ford Explorer 2WD
5. Dodge Caravan/Grand Caravan 2WD
6. Jeep Cherokee 4WD
7. Chevrolet Blazer 4WD
8. Chevrolet C1500 Pickup 2WD
9. Ford F150 Pickup 4WD
10. Ford Windstar FWD Van

Good for them!
Hopefully the "american" car makers will step their game up and make reliable and fuel efficient cars finally!

 

[zman1]

Originally Posted by jp30338
http:///forum/post/3122783
Good for them! ...
I guess "American" is a dirty word... Who'd a thunck we would be so terrible at competing in every industry. Once the the greatest nation on earth. We now are just turning into a dependent of foreign products. We can't even build our own national security military equipment without foriegn assistance now..
I guess the international sellout party is to blame

 

[zman1]

Originally Posted by AquaKnight
http:///forum/post/3122320
Don't believe the government's list for a second. ....
Here are the real lists, which look a ton better.
Top 10 Cars bought under CARS program;
1 Ford Escape
2 Ford Focus
3 Jeep Patriot
4 Dodge Caliber
5 Ford F-150
6 Honda Civic
7 Chevrolet Silverado
8 Chevrolet Cobalt
9 Toyota Corolla
10 Ford Fusion
Top 10 cars traded In;
1 Ford F-150
2 Ford Explorer
3 Jeep Grand Cherokee
4 Chevrolet C/K 1500 sires (Silverado)
5 Dodge Ram Pickup 1500
6 Jeep Cherokee
7 Ford Windstar
8 Chevrolet Blazer
9 Dodge Grand Caravan
10 Ford Ranger
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cash_for_clunkers
Your own Cite indicates these numbers as only WEEK 1
"Top 10 trade-ins and replacements grouping all versions for each model together
during the first week of the program (Edmunds.com independent analysis)[47]"

 

[oscardeuce]

You may be taxed a bit too....
http://www.businessinsider.com/whoop...t-taxed-2009-8

 

[reefraff]

So these people get a 4500.00 gift from we the people then snivel because they have to pay the sales tax

 

[mantisman51]

Here in Az, you only pay sales tax on the amount after trade-in and private buyers don't pay sales tax, at all. Too bad there are so many other states ran by crooks who rob by taxation.

 

[oscardeuce]

Originally Posted by mantisman51
http:///forum/post/3123387
Here in Az, you only pay sales tax on the amount after trade-in and private buyers don't pay sales tax, at all. Too bad there are so many other states ran by crooks who rob by taxation.
I'm with you there. We had to sell one of my fathers apartment complexes just to pay death taxes and other bills the estate has incurred. I managed to get $5,000 more than the property appraised for. This is still not enough, and they want to tax the "profit" that still does not cover the total bills.
One reason I do not want to pay more taxes for anything. I plan on never voting for a tax on anything in my life until the "leaders" can prove they can be frugal with other peoples' money.