April 24, 2009

Carsala, an online application revolutionizing the car buying
experience, announced today the appointment of Michelle Naranjo, also
known as Miss Motor Mouth, to lead Carsala digital communications.
Naranjo will assist with ongoing public relations, market strategy and
contribute to growing the venture funded company’s business
development.

Carsala CEO, Tyler Elliston said of the appointment, “Michelle is a
wonderful addition to our team.  Her industry savvy, expertise with
online media, and distinct voice will be invaluable as we pursue new
ways of communicating how we are revolutionizing the used car buying
process.”

Naranjo brings to Carsala editorial, business development and public
relations experience from the online automotive industry and running
her site, missmotormouth.com, combining experience with enthusiasm for
the automotive world. She is a Yahoo Knowledge Partner in the Cars
category specializing in used and online car transactions.

“Carsala is a timely product that fills a need in the car buying
process,” said Naranjo, “Buyers are often intimidated by the
negotiations and dealers, and more than ever, need to connect with serious
buyers. I love the technology behind this idea which results in the
successful connection of people doing business.”

Based in Berkeley, California, Carsala offers used car buyers peace of mind,
price validation, outsourced research, and professional negotiation in 48
hours or less. Carsala’s primary product is a used car buying service thatsaves auto buyers money, time, and hassle. Whether the buyer is stillchoosing a make and model, knows the model and is looking for the car, or has found a specific car to buy, Carsala offers the best source of unbiased, valuable help.

My friend, Steve Haas, wrote this great article for me back in November about leasing vs buying. I kind of sat on it. A lot. I sat on it for over 3 months because I had this gut feeling that I couldn’t quite place and I didn’t discuss with Steve until today because I am not criticizing what he wrote but in this economic snapshot we are all trying to place ourselves in, it seemed familiar, old school and maybe like we were dating ourselves a bit to believe that we actually live in a time when buying a house and leasing a car was the secret sauce to being a responsible adult.

Oh, how fast this has changed in a mere few months! Granted, I think this was coming for a while but the onset of reality- traditional financing and planning has organically shifted to be a whole new beast which we must all learn- is truly making me think of cars and houses in an entirely new way.

It may have been a Porsche dealer tapdancing the concept of “Buy a house, lease your car” a couple of weeks back to me (as a writer, not a buyer) over a beautiful Boxster leasing for $329 a month in a deserted, sparkling new showroom that made me start thinking about this old cliche. It probably didn’t help matters when several friends decided to put their homes on the market almost on an emergency schedule a few days later so they could sell and rent something before they ended upside down in their equity. (Same friends would never lease and drive cars that are paid for, by the way.)

Then I re-read an article in GQ magazine called “The American Dream, No Money Down” (Don’t ask why I have GQ in my house! That is not polite!) by Joel Lovell from February 2008 and I have to say that while this article raised my killer-mommy-nesting-hackles a year ago, I get what he was not only saying but predicting.

Is this problem really just geographic, as in those on the coasts are the only ones who really need to be concerned about falling housing values? How about stagnating housing prices combined with finance companies completely dropping financing or reducing potential customers to only “A” level credit (scores of 700 and above) only for cars? Or mortgage companies completely stopping all stated income which is refusing home finance to people who want to put 50% down on their homes, but because employers are increasingly turning employees into consultants, are unable to show 2 years of 1099 tax returns?

A lot of people are in a pickle or nearing the looming pickle of having to make these decisions.

Own, rent, house, car, bag it all and try corporate housing a la Grapes of Wrath with a dash of public transportation? Let me know what you think.

Guest post by Steve Haas, with thanks.

Leasing vs. Buying
The recent financial crisis may have reduced the availability of great new-car leasing programs, but some are still available.  This weekend’s newspaper, for example, includes an advertisement for the hot Mazda3 5-door (with automatic transmission) for a lease payment of $219 per month for three years.  This sounds like a very affordable payment for a new car.
I believe it’s fair to say, however, that there is still quite a bit of mystery around auto leasing.  Many consumers are simply scared of such programs and I think a lot of this has to do with a lack of knowledge about how these programs work.  Unlike traditional car loans, the detailed financial terms of an auto lease don’t have to be (and as a result often are not) disclosed.  In order to decide whether a lease is good for you or not, let’s review some of the basics.
What is a lease?
In simple terms, when you lease a car you are paying to use the car for a certain amount of time rather than paying for the entire purchase of the vehicle.  In the example above, Mazda is offering the car for three years for a payment of $219/month (plus a down-payment of $2,814).  This means that aside from taxes and other state fees, the lessee of this car will pay a total of $10,698 to drive the car for 36 months and 36,000 miles.
The terms of the lease are determined by a few things.  First is the price of the car.  This is called the “capitalized cost” in leases versus “purchase price” in regular financing.  In the case of the Mazda, the base MSRP of a Mazda3 5-door automatic is $19,945.  Note, however, that the capitalized cost for your lease doesn’t need to be MSRP.  While many buyers are lured by the advertised payment and don’t ask many questions, if you negotiate the purchase price of the car, trade-in a vehicle on which you have equity, or take advantage of other discounts, the capitalized cost can go down… and thus your payments will as well.  Of course, payments will also rise if you choose a car with more options than the one used to advertise the program or trade in a car on which you owe more than it is worth.
The second item is the amount the car is worth (or more accurately, projected to be worth) at the end of the lease term which is called the “residual value.”  The small print on this Mazda lease offer indicates that the residual value will be $11,169 or roughly 55% of the MSRP of this car new.  This residual value should not change because you negotiated down the capitalized cost… it’s based on a percentage of the MSRP of the car you chose.
The third component is financing cost.  Unlike a regular loan in which we are all familiar with the idea of the annual percentage rate (APR) the finance cost on a lease doesn’t have to be disclosed by law.  To further complicate matters, even if you do ask you will be quoted a “money factor” rather than a straight APR.  This will look like some bizarre number taken down to eight to ten decimal places (e.g. 0.00001625).  If you want a full description of how this cost is calculated, check out this site: http://www.leaseguide.com/lease08.htm.  If you aren’t as interested, simply know that you can multiply the money factor by 2,400 and you will have the approximate APR (the number above works out to 3.9%, for example).  Also note that while you are making payments on the portion of the car you use you will be paying interest on the entire amount… after all, you are tying up the bank’s money for the full capitalized value for three years.
Your payment is then the value of the car lost during the time you drive it (capitalized cost – residual value) plus the financing fees.
Are there advantages to leasing?
In most states, there is an additional savings for lessees versus buyers - taxes.  If you finance the car normally you will need to pay sales tax on the full value of the car up front.  So buying a $20,000 car in a state with 6% sales tax will require you to add $1,200 to your cost up front (or included in your loan).  On a lease one typically pays this sales tax only on the monthly payment… or in our example 6% of $219 or roughly $13/month or $473 over the term of the lease.  If you don’t plan to keep the car for more than three years anyway, the additional taxes are a loss.
Perhaps the biggest advantage to leasing is a lower monthly payment.  For this example I am comparing this lease program to financing offered on the same car by Mazda at 3.9% over 5 years.  I’m assuming that if you qualify for the lease you will also qualify for the best available finance rate.  I’m also assuming, for calculations sake that sales tax is 6% in your state and I am ignoring registration and title fees which would need to be paid regardless of your purchase method.  I’m keeping the cash down payment (called the “capitalized cost reduction” in leasing) equal between the two methods.

You can see that the monthly payment is about $79 higher for a traditional purchase (34% higher than the lease) even with the great financing APR.
Is leasing a good idea for me?
Whether leasing is a good idea for you depends on a number of factors.
First, do you plan to get a new car every few years anyway?  If so, leasing may save you money in taxes and reduces your monthly payment.  If you live in a state with higher taxes than my example the advantage is even greater.  There is definitely something positive to be said for the idea of always driving a car with a factory warranty.
Can you live with the mileage limitations of the lease?  The Mazda lease is limited to 36,000 miles during the lease period (12k miles per year is considered average for an American driver, by the way).  Be sure to note the mileage allowance and the fee you must pay if you exceed this amount.  In the old days, the overage fees could be exorbitant (25 to 50 cents per mile, for example).  Mazda’s lease program charges 15 cents per mile over, so an extra 1,000 miles/year for three years would cost you $450… pretty fair.  However, if you commute 100 miles each day or plan to take numerous cross-country road trips you would be advised to think twice about leasing or ask about a lease with more miles included… this will usually lower the residual value.
Are you comfortable knowing that you will need to make another car buying decision again in two or three years?  When your lease is up you will need to turn the car back in and buy another or decide whether you want to buy the car you just leased.  Typically you can purchase the car for the agreed-upon residual value.  If you find that the residual value is lower than the cost of a comparable car on the used-car market this might be a good deal for you.  If it’s higher, you can just turn it back in and let the leasing company take the hit.  In fact, it’s this latter example which is partly responsible for the decline in available leasing programs.  The banks and captive finance companies (like GMAC and Ford Motor Credit) used lease programs to move a lot of iron over the past decade.  The recent sudden decline in the resale value of SUVs, as one example, means that they were left with a lot of lease returns worth considerably less than they planned for.  Of course, if you were the lessee of a Chevy Tahoe this would seem like a blessing to you… the bank was left holding the risk, you met your obligations by making the monthly payments on the lease and now just walk away from the vehicle.
How important are monthly payments to your budget?  In our example above for a moderately priced car with a very low 60-month finance rate the payments are lower for leasing… probably enough to cover the average monthly cable and telephone bill.  Alternatively, some people choose to lease so they can drive a nicer car than they could otherwise afford for the same monthly payment.
In terms of long-term cost, however, leasing isn’t necessarily the most cost-effective choice.  Assuming that you keep the car for a long time and make your payments for five years you will actually own the car.  If you leased you don’t own a thing.  No matter what the used Mazda will be worth in 5 years it’s safe to say that it won’t be zero.  Cars do eventually wear out and get recycled, but even then there is some value to the raw materials!  For comparison sake, the KBB private party value for a 2003 Mazda Protege5 (which was replaced by the Mazda3 Hatchback in Mazda’s lineup) with 60,000 miles is roughly $8,500.  Assuming this Mazda 3 is worth around the same amount (though it does cost more new than the Protege5 did in its day) the cost to finance and drive the same car for 5 years then sell is only $1,800 higher than leasing it for only 3.
The outright least expensive way to own a car is to buy it and keep it until repair costs start to outweigh its value.  Or, as many people prefer, to buy a car when it is already a couple of years old (perhaps being sold by the finance company after someone’s lease has ended) and it has already experienced its largest depreciation hit.  However, many of us have limited budgets and lack the desire to deal with the inevitable inconveniences that come with older cars.  If this describes you, leasing may provide a convenient and cost effect option now that you understand how they work.

Recently there was a repeat showing of Top Gear on BBC America about the Honda Civic Type R that was updated for the UK market in 2007. It reminded me of how a slightly used older generation of the same model can be a better investment and even a better drive but it is also important it is to take care to have a used car inspected by a trust worthy 3rd party inspector.

In our relevant tale of the 2001 Honda Civic Type R vs. the 2007 Honda Civic Type R, the 2007 did well in terms of its power, speed, etc but had some flaws in handling & finish. The 2007 was about £17,000.00 while its 2001 predecessor could be had for a handy £10,000.00 with reasonable mileage. Considering that the spoiler on the 2007 was right in the line if sight in the rear view mirror (just like the 2009 Nissan 350Z NIZMO’s spoiler), that could be a deal breaker for some buyers looking for a sporty car. Also, a 2001 has gone through the biggest loss in depreciation while the 2007 will dump about 40% in the first 18 months. So… buy the 2001, right?

Well, don’t be so fast, Speedracer! There are many things to consider when buying used and especially with cars that have a tendency (ahem- just speculating here) to be involved in street racing.

Newer cars that tend to be tuners like the Type R may appear to be well cared for on the surface but often they are driven hard regardless of the age of the previous owner (but lets be real- they tend towards the younger and younger thinking crowd).

• Accidents will be found
• Original parts will be checked
• Non-original parts will be listed

Lets put it like this:

You find a gorgeous 350z that (you could almost swear) the seller had you in mind when they customized it.

• Your insurance company won’t cover your injuries because of the aftermarket seat belts!

That Scion Xb looks like the perfect price and the thing to keep your tuner heart humming!

• But they neglected to mention the wreck. And the insurance fraud.

And that darling CRX has a modified system to die for!

• And your car may not be street legal.

Just buy smart and enjoy your ride.

Originally posted here

GM and Chrysler have decided to offer hourly employees buyouts to leave the companies and decrease their expenses again. That really isn’t that shocking considering that the companies are desperately trying to pare down expenses in order to meet the terms of a bailout for the industry but there are a couple of interesting points about this round of buyouts that are interesting:

The Old Gray Mare Ain’t Worth What She Used To Be

Last year GM was able to trim down a quarter of its workforce- about 19,000 hourly workers in all. But the employees who decided to bail before the bailout were offered a lot more money than the employees being asked to leave now. How much more? About $120,000 each! That is right- before the slide became the avalanche on the car lots last summer, GM was offering employees $140,000 each to voluntarily leave the company. Given that they also had to forgo health and insurance benefits when they left, it really isn’t that much of an offer in the scheme of things. The employees who were either not offered the buyout or turned it down now are going to be offered a buyout package at a deep discount of $20,000 to leave and a $25,000 voucher for a ….what else……a free car.

But The Wagon Maintained Its Value?

With photos coming out recently of excessively unsold inventories of cars piling up around the world it seems that the value of unsold cars would be plummeting but they aren’t. Yet. Imagine what happens when all of these employees who take the buyouts end up with cars they don’t need but have payments due for things that they do need, like housing. The cars will potentially end up on the market and at deeply discounted prices because the employees are now deeply discounted in their employment value. Call it a Former Employee Discount. And the dealers will not make a dime from these transactions because these cars will be sold on Craigslist.

Back On The Farm

Recent ‘temporary layoffs” have hit all of the Big 3’s plants and most do not seem to have an end in site. Usually the plants shut down for 2 weeks around the Christmas holidays but this year the holiday period is extending into mid-February at the very earliest for even some of the most successful plants, including GM’s Fairfax plant in the Kansas City area. Fairfax employees have been producing two of GM’s biggest successes: the Chevy Malibu and the Saturn Aura. Currently between employee compensations from GM (negotiated by UAW 31) and unemployment benefits the workers are drawing about 90% of their normal wages but the state has been slow in paying because of the sheer volume of sudden claims coming their way. Any suggested or the inevitable forced buyout will further strain the state which has until recently maintained better than average unemployment.

(I am curious if GM ever received a $146,000,000 bond initiative that was being presented if they would make a mid-sized car at the Fairfax plant because I am pretty sure that mid-size is the new Buick LaCrosse that was already in pre-production at the plant when they sent all of the workers home for their long winter nap.)

“Forced buyouts”, you ask? If employees don’t accept the package to leave then they probably will be given a ticket to ride. And that may not include a free car.

I heard a story last month about a GM employee who had worked in the marketing department for over 15 years but still made less than the people who worked on the lines for less than 10 years. When this marketing guy left he went to another company with a nice parting bonus from GM and a $75,000 increase in pay at the next company. His value went up while the workers on the line he used to resent are being devalued every day.

After an attempt of starting his own media empire online and getting shut out, former Hot Rod Mag guy and renegade David Freiburger is returning to his roots at Hot Rod Magazine.

This has made a lot of people angry but gosh…

If you were one of the 2K plus laid off last week by Primedia then just keep telling your wife it was because Dave was expensive and you were sacrificed to get him back (as you are a genius!!!!). Tell her I said you are, indeed, a genius.

In another round of background to this story:

The talented who were not deemed dead weight and still have jobs are invigorated and excited by his return.

Bring it back, Dave! hasn’t rung so true since Wendy’s lost marketshare!!!

(does any one read this crap?)

The leaving and returning of David Freibuger

Recently I “overheard” someone say that if a small company like Tesla could make it, what the hell is wrong with GM and Ford?

Oh boy. We should probably all be very grateful that is not the case.

The contemporary electric car is such a lovely romantic idea and I am not one to knock the dreamers but at the rate that the independent electric car makers are going we better keep our bicycles tuned up for quite a while.

Tesla has been a PR machine. Until recently. Delayed production has led to rumors and snafus abound. Imagine being the buyer of a Tesla Roadster. You have made a $50,000 deposit two years ago and you haven’t received your car. You hear through the grapevine that employees found out about a layoff through a blog written by the CEO to the general public. Not you, the early adopter. And then, just to make your day, you get a letter from Tesla telling you that when your car is eventually delivered you will have to pay more than you originally had agreed to paying. Even the proprietary charger that was included in the base price is now going to cost you extra. Its like buying a battery operated toy and getting home only to find out that batteries were not included even though the salesman told you they were. AND you are paying more than the $100K you signed for. {”Honey? Don’t buy the organic wine for a couple of months!”]

If that is the case then you have arrived as most of the country cannot fathom (but fantasizes) about being so “lucky”.

Aptera (yeh, I will be cliche here and say “that Jetson looking EV”) is having its own bumps. Recently they were all ready to go into production having built a 70,000+ sq. ft. facility a third of the way between LA and San Diego and no man’s land and hire on a full team for their Robin Reliant by Dr. Who vision of the EV.  Candidates were aplenty but, you know, sorry, the project is on hold for a *few* months now. They are looking for additional funding now and won’t be hiring in the near future.

What about ZAP (which is such an adorbs car that I almost forgive them) and years of false promises and bad press?

The independent gas to electric conversion companies are still around, struggling, asking for capital (remember when we used to call it money?) but are still at least a year from fully operational and that is with conditions and a $20K plus price tag to convert your car of choice.

Fact is, this is not Tucker the Movie. It isn’t even Lee Iacoccoa’s world. For years- and I mean YEARS- the venture capital world has funded and lost its love of the EV. Many a CEO has probably told their families that the dot com they walked away from which gave them a nice life would be so much better if they gambled their equity (SLASH fortune) into something green, something progressive, something that will mean something to the kids. Oh, the justification of the green. Dollars, I mean.

So now the EV independents are jumping on the bail-out bandwagon. They’re asking the government to help them when for the last several years their venture capital seeking expeditions has forced them to suffer in Aspen, San Francisco, London, Paris, Miami and other low rent districts. It has been so hard for them.

So what about GM and the myths about these PR machines? GM is a PR machine too and talks a lot of talk and has yet to prove anything EV but they are working (and I mean hard) to meet this. But why? Because of demand. Irony is that everyone loves the idea that their dollars count and for years and years Normal Joe’s have “voted” for high consumption guzzlers while their [INSERT FRIEND/RELATIVE HERE] was getting paid (and paid WELL with health care) for making the cars that they demanded.

Not that anyone really cares. It is fun to place blame. And, oh, that Joe? He is mad now. And his kids don’t have healthcare because he didn’t want to be that guy on the line.

… but everyone has an opinion despite the fact that if everyone complaining actually owned their past demands then they would realize the the fault does not lie in the car companies and that despite of the fact that you can’t wander without tripping over yet another EV company, the alt.fuel deficit all belongs to every one of us.

And yeh. I am back.

XOO,M

The other day, after returning from a trip out of town, I went to pick up my dogs from the kennel (they like to call it summer camp). As I parked on the street in this semi-industrial, older area of Long Beach, I happened to glance across the street and did the complete cartoon double take. Wha?

Sitting in front of this strip of anonymous looking workshops was a Datsun 2000, a gorgeous new Mazda RX-8 and a kitted out custom RX-7. I was drawn across the road like a magnet and was walking around all 3 cars like a complete idiot. How many girls dressed like a cross between Olive Oyl and Frida Khalo show up at a tuner shop wanting to see more? Not many, I would imagine. A young employee came to the bay door and asked me if I wanted to come inside and see more. Of course, I did! Inside was a small army of mostly RX-7’s stripped down and just waiting to be gussied up into the high performance sexy beasts that they can become. Ah- the smell of Bondo on a warm afternoon! The shop is called Asuka Designs. Here is a great video of the owner of Asuka explaining the benefit of carbon fiber bodies:

Now the interesting aspect of carbon fiber bodies is that they aren’t just for the tuner crowd anymore. The Department of Energy’s Oak Ridge National Laboratory, along with Ford, GM and Daimler Chrysler are working to bring carbon fiber bodies to all cars at a lower cost. In an article by Physorg.com, spokesman Bob Norris for Oak Ridge Labs said:

“Whereas today the cost to purchase commercial-grade carbon fiber is between $8 and $10 per pound, the goal is to reduce that figure to between $3 and $5 per pound,” said Norris, leader of ORNL’s Polymer Matrix Composites Group. At that price, it would become feasible for automakers to use more than a million tons of composites – approximately 300 pounds of composites per vehicle – annually in the manufacturing of cars.

Carbon fiber is 1/5th the weight of ferrous counterparts used in automobile manufacturing while it has the same strength properties which if used in even half of the structural and semi-structural elements in a car can reduce the weight by 60% and reduce fuel consumption by 30%. Greenhouse gases and emissions could be reduced by as much as 10-20%.

Not only would these cheaper and strong fibers be made of recycled plastics, lignin from wood pulp and cellulose so therefor better for the environment, safety tests with the new fibers are showing that they are just as strong, if not stronger than ferrous materials. Cars made with plastic elements are neither as strong, good for the environment (PVCs keep us relying on the oil industry) and to a real car enthusiast- plastics, in my opinion, do not allow for good design integrity. Additionally, the better that they learn to make low-impact carbon fiber, the cheaper it will become which will inevitably lead to less expensive car that utilize any fuel source- especially alternative fuels.

Interestingly, although carbon fiber will eventually go down in cost to the manufacturer, don’t expect to be getting a Tesla Roadster for any less than current retail price. Part of the development and sales of that vehicle are counting on lower manufacturing cost of both the carbon fiber body and the batteries so that eventually, they will be actually able to make a profit on the high performance Roadster.

So while you may chuckle at the kids and older kids driving around in a tricked out tuner with a tail end that makes their car look like a grocery cart with a really big handle, many of the components that they are experimenting with to make their cars more high performance can change the way that all of our cars are made eventually to be lighter, meaner and greener.

Originally posted here

This is one of those eerie times when I feel the silence before that moment when lack of knowledge becomes full knowledge and those who find out the truth cannot go back (and I won’t be able to take back what I am getting ready to say).

Cars get crushed every day but not just in the junk yards where wrecked and unrepairable cars go to die.

Which cars are getting crushed?
Some cars are squeaky clean, have leather seats, full navigation systems, V6’s or V8 engines with far less than 30,000 miles on them. They still have that new car smell and in some cases, will still have bits of protective film covering the interior parts. For the most part they could never be considered damaged except for the odd scratch or ding that comes from brushing against the car or pulling a suitcase out of the trunk. Most of them are so new that they are not even on the dealers’ lots yet so they are considered pre-production vehicles but are made pretty much the way subsequent ones will be made. Later ones are just made faster.

Who is crushing this lost tribe of cars?
Their makers. The automotive manufacturers, foreign and domestic.

What was their crime?
They were review cars for journalists, film cars for advertising placement in big budget movies and television shows and sometimes were just lenders to high profile (and sometimes B-list) celebrities. Sometimes they only sat on an auto show floor for the public to crawl in and out of. They were part of the marketing engine.

Why are they being crushed?
To tell you the truth, not by the choice of the manufacturers. No creator likes to see their offspring, their pride and joy, the result of years of hard work reduced to an over-sized smashed can. Some of these cars are such special editions that they have features and packages that will never be seen in combination again and could be valued at an extremely high price (if they even could be sold). But they have to crush them. The government requires that they destroy them. These cars are usually off the same production line that the cars come from for safety tests and so are licensed to the manufacturer but the title is not transferable. You cannot legally register one of these cars even if the manufacturer sold it in a charity auction. A rogue auto employee couldn’t even hide one in their garage forever; the government checks up on these things!

The cars are not even allowed to be dismantled so that parts like seats and stereos can be reused because the government knows that eventually someone would build their own car out of refuse. Mind you, perfectly good, often high end refuse.

I am not pointing fingers at any manufacturer in particular because they are all held to the same standards. Maybe this will make some of them uncomfortable that I am even telling you this and I want to reinforce to them that, on this point, I am on your side. What would be better for brand building than to see rare editions turn up in auctions like vintage rare edition cars can and sell for ridiculously cool prices?

And to those of us who have driven these cars: I feel guilty and sad when I see my time end with one of these cars destined to be destroyed. Sometimes I wonder if I have played a part in a wasteful destruction. What I do know is that the manufacturers don’t like it either. It is an unspoken death because their hands are tied.

All that I know is that at a time when the car makers are being criticized for wasteful behavior it is makes sense to sometimes look further than the actions and try to get to the reason. There are always blatant examples within every company (automotive and non-automotive related) where waste can be highlighted in the media. It is sometimes the unspoken waste resulting from an industry held to standardized practices for safety and the environment directly by the government and the manufacturer swallowing, taking their lump and trying to move ahead that should be reported.

Most of this government regulation stems from emissions and safety concerns but to such a degree that one European luxury manufacturer will not import its very saleable models because they are handmade and the government wants a dozen or so to crash. These regulations also are the reason that a lot of American manufacturers do not sell their best models in the US.

RIP all of the 2009 cars conceived by artists, executed by engineers and have now gone to meet their maker.

XOO,Michelle

Originally posted here