Double Whammy – Canada follows suit; Rejects GM and Chrysler restructuring plans
(Source: Autoblog; Photo: Benjamin Davidson@ Flickr)
(Source: Autoblog; Photo: Benjamin Davidson@ Flickr)
(Source: ABC News)
Rick Wagoner will leave his post as CEO of bailed-out General Motors with a $20 million retirement package, the company’s financial filings show.
Although the Treasury Department has barred GM from paying severance toWagoner or any other senior executive, Wagoner is eligible to collect millions in retirement benefits from his former employer, according to the documents reviewed by ABC News.
The Obama administration asked for Wagoner to resign Sunday, as part of its restructuring of the auto industry. President Obama said this morning that forcing Wagoner out indicated it was a time for new leadership.
Under Wagoner’s leadership, GM lost tens of billions of dollars, took billions in taxpayer-financed aid, and announced plans to cut 47,000 employees by the end of 2009.
Click here to read the entire article. For those interested in reading Wagoner’s farewell e-mail, please visit The Truth About Cars.
For those who care to know, here is what GM’s Executive Officer Severance Policy looks like (Thanks, an0nymous poster @EVcast):
General Motors executive officers are generally at-will employees who serve at the discretion of the Board. In early 2005, GM adopted a policy applicable to executive officers requiring stockholder approval of any severance benefits if:
• The executive’s employment was terminated prior to retirement; and
• The present value of the proposed severance benefits would exceed 2.99 times the sum of the executive’s annual base salary and target annual incentive.
Note: TransportGooru wonders if this culture of execessively compensating under-performing, over-paid must-be-retired executives will ever come to an end? If Mr. Wagoner has any iota of ethics that his alma mater (Harvard Business School) tries to inculcate in its wards, he must politely decline and walk away without taking a penny from this $20mil payout.
(Source: Autoblog; Image: Doug Mills @ New York Times)
President Obama has just finished his press conference on the government’s determination of the viability of General Motors and Chrysler, and the gist is that both automakers have failed to convince the feds that their business plans deserve further investment. Obama and his task force will give GM enough working capital to survive another 60 days and prove its viability, though no dollar amount was given. Chrysler, meanwhile, is being given another 30 days and working capital up to $6 billion to finalize a partnership deal with Fiat. If a deal can’t be made and another partner is not found, Chrysler will get no more federal aid. Also, Fiat won’t be allowed to take a majority stake in Chrysler until the automaker repays all the money it has borrowed from the government so far.
Perhaps the biggest news from the press conference is that the U.S. government will now fully back the warranties on vehicles sold by General Motors and Chrysler in the hopes that buyers will continue to consider their products amidst these tumultuous restructuring efforts. Also, the President has pledged to work with Congress to find funds to pay for a U.S.-version of the Cash for Clunkers program that has been so successful in Germany.
BREAKING NEWS Report from WSJ: The Obama administration’s leading plan to fix General Motors Corp. and Chrysler LLC would use bankruptcy filings to purge the ailing companies of their biggest problems, including bondholder debt and retiree health-care costs, according to people familiar with the matter.
(Source: The Transport Politic & Telegraph, UK)
With support from Tories and Labour, project construction is virtually guaranteed
The United Kingdom, despite its intense population concentration and relatively straight-shot connection between its biggest cities, has yet to invest in a major high-speed program, unlike its peers in France, Spain, and Germany. Beginning late last year, however, the Conservative Party, under leader David Cameron and shadow Transportation Minister Teresa Villiers, began pressuring the Labour-controlled government to begin planning a high-speed rail link between London and Manchester, via Birmingham, as a replacement for the planned third runway at Heathrow airport. Plans to route the line through the airport to allow easy connections to flights were incorporated into the proposal almost immediately.
Though in January Labour did approve the runway at Heathrow as a way to relieve the significant congestion there, the U.K.’s ruling party has come to see a high-speed rail program as politically advantageous – especially as Mr. Cameron’s party has risen in popularity in recent years. It’s not surprising, then, to see Lord Andrew Adonis, the nation’s Minister of State for Transport, endorsing the line’s approval by early next year, before the next general election. With support from both major parties, the line is unlikely to face major opposition – and will likely get government funding as soon as its route has been finalized.
The map above illustrates the general consensus on the routing of the full route (in red). Running northwest from London, the line would hit Birmingham and then Manchester, before heading north to Leeds, Edinburgh, and Glasgow. A spur line from Manchester to Liverpool is likely, and, if conservatives and engineering company Arup get their way, the line would be routed through Heathrow Airport before extending north. Planning on the service has begun by a company called High Speed 2; the name is a reference to High Speed 1, the company that completed the Channel Tunnel Rail Link in 2007 (in black on the map above). High Speed 1 carries Eurostar trains from London to Paris and Brussels in 2h15 and 1h50, respectively, down 40 minutes from pre-construction travel times.
Click here to read the entire Transport Politic article.
(Source: CNNMoney.com Video: MSNBC via YouTube)
White House and GM sources had told CNN Sunday that Wagoner would resign as part of the federal government’s bailout strategy for the troubled automaker.
“On Friday I was in Washington for a meeting with Administration officials. In the course of that meeting, they requested that I ‘step aside’ as CEO of GM, and so I have,” Wagoner said in a statement posted to the GM Web site.
He is being replaced by GM’s president and chief operating officer, Fritz Henderson. Kent Kresa will serve as interim chairman.
“Having worked closely with Fritz for many years, I know that he is the ideal person to lead the company through the completion of our restructuring efforts. His knowledge of the global industry and the company are exceptional, and he has the intellect, energy, and support among GM’ers worldwide to succeed,” Wagoner said.
Click here to read the entire article.
(Source: Business Week)
Some 14 months later, Tata is set to show off the commercial version of the Nano, on Mar. 23. Today, the U.S. auto industry is struggling to survive, with General Motors (GM), once the world’s biggest carmaker, on the brink of bankruptcy. Look beyond the Nano halo and it’s clear that Tata Motors has problems of its own, from the $2.3 billion in debt it took on to purchase Jaguar and Land Rover from Ford Motor (F) last year to the sums sunk into the Nano assembly plant in West Bengal that had to be abandoned. On top of that, there are the Nano competitors in development.
Still, no one disputes that the Nano is innovative on multiple levels—from its engineering to its marketing to its manufacturing. So it’s hard to avoid the question: What can a humbled Detroit learn from the Tata Nano?
A lot. The lessons start with the vision of Ratan Tata, chairman of Tata Motors’ parent, Tata Group, to create an ultralow-cost car for a new category of Indian consumer: someone who couldn’t afford the $5,000 sticker price of what was then the cheapest car on the market and instead drove his family around on a $1,000 motorcycle. “Just in India there are 50 million to 100 million people caught in that automotive chasm,” says vice-president Vikas Sehgal, a principal at Booz & Co. And yet none of the automakers in India were focused on that segment. In that respect, the Nano is a great example of the so-called blue ocean strategy.
“Great companies are built on creating new markets, not increasing market share in existing ones,” says Vijay Govindarajan, a professor at Tuck School of Business at Dartmouth College and chief innovation consultant at General Electric (GE), who quickly runs off 10 lessons for Detroit. Among them: U.S. automakers should focus less on incremental improvements to existing cars or adding a new model to the Cadillac line in order to compete against Lexus, and think more broadly about new market opportunities. Where, in other words, are Detroit’s blue oceans?
Click here to read the entire article.
(Source: Autobloggreen)
The capital of Texas with its 750,000 residents is appreciably bigger than Ulm and is distinguished by its open-mindedness and its very involved citizens. “We very much look forward to becoming the first international partner of car2go,” says mayor Will Wynn. “Our city is known for its strong sense of environmental responsibility. car2go fits this wonderfully because we can then offer the residents of Austin an intelligent mobility concept with a high positive environmental factor. The project has our full support.”As in the first phase of the German pilot project, car2go will begin in Austin with a defined group of users, for example city employees. It is then planned to make car2go accessible to the public in Austin in a second step. Other factors predestining Austin to be the first international car2go city are the city’s size and its up-to-date economic structure. Among other things it is the location of the fourth largest university in the USA. Beginning in autumn 2009 a fleet expected to number 200 smart fortwo mhd vehicles with automatic start/stop function will be put into operation there.
(Source: Autoblog; Picture: Autoblog)
What can $50,000 can get you?
After a lot of hype and delivery of 250 Tesla Roadsters, the company’s Model S was unveiled today in Hawthorne, California. It is expect that production will be ramped up to 20,000 units annually by the end of the first year of production; after the $7,500 tax break, the Model S will start at just under $50,000 – $49,900 to be exact; and 440-volt charging will be available. That base price is for the 160-mile range pack; a 230-mile range pack and a 300-mile range packwill also be available. The biggest hitch: the car doesn’t go into production until Q3 of 2011.
Transportgooru thinks this is a game changer and here is the “why”:
These facts are what one would come to expect from a conventiona, gasoline powered automobiles that rules the roads today. As more charging stations pop-up around the country, these vehicles will make transportation seamless. The few cons that could be obviously recognized are the re-charging times and the lack of charging stations at public locations (Gas stations, parking lots, etc). With the conventional gasoline cars, refuelling is quick and doesn’t take more than 5 minutes at the gas stations, which means you can continue travelling without enduring massing delays while traveling longer distances. It can be expected that unveiling of such cars renders a wonderful opportunity for regional electric companies to enter a niche market to provide “electricity” through charging stations in the service areas along highways, just like a gas station. Or even better if these charging stations are added to existing gas stations. If charging times can be shortened with the advent of new technology (See the TransportGooru article about MIT’s breakthrough research on batteries, allowing for lightening quick charging times)
Click here to read the entire post on Autoblog’s site anddon’t forget to check out the eye popping Tesla Gallery. Here is Wall Street Journal’s interview with Tesla at the North American Int’l Auto Show (via YouTube):
(Source: Boston Globe)
Mass. officials say public works that would have the biggest impact – and create the most jobs – may be left out
Governor Deval Patrick’s administration has determined that dozens of worthy projects are not eligible for federal stimulus money because the US government has dictated that only certain types of public improvements can be funded, even if they have limited economic potential.
When it approved the stimulus package, Congress restricted the use of about $800 million of transportation funds to projects that have been included on a list of public improvements states put together annually. It often takes years for a project to work its way onto that list.
In Massachusetts, many of those projects are simple jobs – paving roads or fixing sidewalks – and usually do not trigger another round of associated development that would employ a larger number of people. The congressional restriction prevents Patrick from using the money for some larger highway and transit upgrades that aren’t on the list but that would spur development of homes, office parks, and retail stores.
Click here to read the entire article.
(Source: Streetsblog)
The Congress for the New Urbanism has some intriguing answers. During the stimulus debate, CNU proposed a new type of federal road funding that would help to build connected grids — the kind of streets that livable communities are made of. The proposal didn’t make it into the stimulus package before the bill got rushed out the door, but the upcoming federal transportation bill will provide another chance. CNU President John Norquist — a four-term mayor of Milwaukee who first got into politics as an anti-freeway advocate — was down in DC last Thursday to share his ideas with Congress. Streetsblog spoke to him afterward about what’s broken with national transportation policy and how to fix it. Here’s the first part of our interview.
Ben Fried: During the stimulus debate you sent a letter to James Oberstar, chair of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, and among other things you said that discussion of national transportation policy often presents a “false dichotomy” between transit funding and road funding. What did you mean?