Ford Focus Forum banner
1 - 20 of 31 Posts

REDFOCZ

· Registered
Joined
·
1,229 Posts
Discussion starter · #1 ·
DETROIT - Aiming to capitalize on consumer angst about the high cost of gasoline, General Motors Corp. on Tuesday said it would cap pump prices at $1.99 for customers in California and Florida who buy certain vehicles by July 5.

One hitch to the promotion is that customers must also agree to enroll in the OnStar vehicle diagnostic service, which is free for the first year but after that will cost $16.95 a month. The other is that many of the eligible vehicles are serious gas guzzlers.

The offer is good for 2006 and 2007 model year vehicles. In California, eligible vehicles are the Chevrolet Tahoe and Suburban sport utility vehicles and Impala and Monte Carlo sedans; the GMC Yukon and Yukon XL SUVs; the Hummer H2 and H3 SUVs; the Cadillac SRX SUV; and the Pontiac Grand Prix and Buick LaCrosse sedans. In Florida, eligible vehicles are the Impala, Monte Carlo, Grand Prix and LaCrosse.

Customers must buy or lease an eligible vehicle between May 25 and July 5 and enroll in the OnStar diagnostic service, which automatically runs checks on the vehicle and sends e-mail notices to owners each month.

Each month for one year, GM will give drivers a credit on a prepaid card based on their estimated fuel usage. Fuel usage will be calculated by the miles they drive, as recorded by OnStar, and the vehicle's fuel economy rating.

GM will credit drivers the difference between the average price per gallon in their state and the $1.99 cap. The credits can be used through December 2007. Consumers wouldn't get any credits if gas prices fall below $1.99.

GM said a California resident who buys a 2007 Chevrolet Tahoe and drives 1,000 miles per month would get an estimated $103.75 monthly credit, based on the current average premium fuel price of $3.65 per gallon, GM said. A Florida resident who drives a 2006 Buick LaCrosse about 1,000 miles per month would get an estimated monthly credit of $60 based on the current premium fuel price of $3.19.

GM spokeswoman Deborah Silverman said GM picked California and Florida in part because the company wants to increase sales in those states. Silverman said GM will see how successful the program is before deciding whether to expand it to other states.

GM's newly redesigned full-size SUVs like the Tahoe have been big sellers this spring despite rising gas prices. In the first four months of this year, Tahoe sales were up 36 percent. The rebate could help older, slower-selling SUVs like the Hummer H2, which saw sales fall 19 percent in the same period.

GM's car sales were down 12 percent through April. While some cars have bucked that trend — Pontiac Grand Prix sales were up 24 percent — the rebate could help stragglers like the Buick LaCrosse, which saw sales fall 21 percent.

After years of watching customers focus on their deals instead of their vehicles, GM has been cutting back on incentive spending in favor of lower overall pricing. In April, the company lowered per-vehicle incentives by 26 percent to $2,836, the biggest drop of any U.S. automaker.

Silverman said the new program isn't straying from GM's strategy. The automaker has always said it would continue to use targeted incentives to focus on particular vehicles or regions, she said.
 
I find it EXTREMELY humorous that I just watched Bob Lutz on Autoline Detroit yesterday talking about how CAFE won't work, and the only way to get Americans to really cut back on consumption is to increase gas taxes, but that would never happen because the politicians won't touch it.

Yet... here is GM subsidizing the fuel prices to push their worst offenders.

Nice. Real nice. Little hypocritical?

So Ron, is the Autoline Detroit really such a great forum to get a better understanding inside the auto industry? Or just a another forum for corporate spin?
 
Aren't the people buying the big gas guzzlers normally the ones taht aren't too worried about how much they are spending on gas anyways?

I think this is dumb. You pay to play. If you want the big truck or hummer, you have to deal with all the pros and cons of it.
 
02_smurf said:
Aren't the people buying the big gas guzzlers normally the ones taht aren't too worried about how much they are spending on gas anyways?

I think this is dumb. You pay to play. If you want the big truck or hummer, you have to deal with all the pros and cons of it.

....and i think the public, by and large, is saying they won't play, so this is GM's way of trying to move inventory.

if anything, though, i could easily see this baskfiring on GM. when the manufacturer is even telling you 'yeah, this is gonna get REAL expensive,' that should really stand as an eye-opener.

Mike
 
P-51 said:
Yet... here is GM subsidizing the fuel prices to push their worst offenders.
QFT. One word: Bull****. :thumbdown

The money spent subsidizing SUVs and pushing BS uneccessary services could be spent on materials and engines to make the vehicles more fuel efficient in the first place. :rolleyes:
 
P-51 said:
I find it EXTREMELY humorous that I just watched Bob Lutz on Autoline Detroit yesterday talking about how CAFE won't work, and the only way to get Americans to really cut back on consumption is to increase gas taxes, but that would never happen because the politicians won't touch it.

Yet... here is GM subsidizing the fuel prices to push their worst offenders.

Nice. Real nice. Little hypocritical?

So Ron, is the Autoline Detroit really such a great forum to get a better understanding inside the auto industry? Or just a another forum for corporate spin?
I think in a way they are proveing what they just said. If you make gas cheep, people will buy a big car, if gas is expensive, they will flock to smaller cars. They happen to have some big cars to get rid of so they are lowering the price of gas to sell them.

They are manipulating the trend to move cars that they allready built, but they don't have anything agains the goverment doing the reverse in the future.

Mandating higher fuel economy makes it almost impossable to make small nitch "halo cars" since the fuel mileage is regualted. If you simpally make the gas expensive, most people would buy a sensable car, but they can still make the image "halo cars" and they can still sell them if people do want them and are willing to pay the price.

With mandatory economy requiorments you CANT make them, and you CANT buy them no matter what.
 
this might be a good thing if it was on their whole line up.

but why give relieve to those that dont need it? Why can't I be rich, then gm could buy my gas!
 
Suckman69 said:
QFT. One word: Bull****. :thumbdown

The money spent subsidizing SUVs and pushing BS uneccessary services could be spent on materials and engines to make the vehicles more fuel efficient in the first place. :rolleyes:
Oh I agree but GM doesn't nor will they ever think that way.Also one of the reasons why they just slipped to #2 in global sales for the first time ever to Toyota.
 
With mandatory economy requiorments you CANT make them, and you CANT buy them no matter what.
That's not true. BMW and MB don't meet the CAFE requirements. They just pay a penalty, something like $1000 per car. It's not a huge deal on a $40k luxury car.

this might be a good thing if it was on their whole line up.

but why give relieve to those that dont need it? Why can't I be rich, then gm could buy my gas!
GM isn't buying their gas. The people are buying their own gas. Basically, GM is selling them a hedge fund on the price of gas, and they are rolling it into their financing. Simple as that.
 
Its really simple. Rather than setting mandatory fuel requirements, just make a simple incentive system.

Anticipate what a reasonable fuel economy range for the average passenger vehicle is. Then take the top 10% of fuel consumers and charge the manufacturer the usual gas-guzzler tax, and take that tax and offer it as a rebate for the top 10% of fuel misers. Vinegar if you do "bad" and honey if you do "good". :)

While we're at it, ditch any hybrid programs left. It shouldn't matter what method you use to achieve high fuel economy, only whether it is high or it is low. GM has hybrid pickups that get fuel economy in the teens afterall. And speaking of pickups, if its on the streets and isn't registered as a commerical vehicle, its a passenger car like any other and should not be treated differently.
 
REDFOCZ

Consumers wouldn't get any credits if gas prices fall below $1.99.
RIGHT.
:lol:

Like that will ev4r happen.


Hey, RED; one should always supply a link to the article quoted... :thumbup:
 
Suckman69 said:
Its really simple. Rather than setting mandatory fuel requirements, just make a simple incentive system.

Anticipate what a reasonable fuel economy range for the average passenger vehicle is. Then take the top 10% of fuel consumers and charge the manufacturer the usual gas-guzzler tax, and take that tax and offer it as a rebate for the top 10% of fuel misers. Vinegar if you do "bad" and honey if you do "good". :)

While we're at it, ditch any hybrid programs left. It shouldn't matter what method you use to achieve high fuel economy, only whether it is high or it is low. GM has hybrid pickups that get fuel economy in the teens afterall. And speaking of pickups, if its on the streets and isn't registered as a commerical vehicle, its a passenger car like any other and should not be treated differently.
Canada has announced just that. It's called a "Feebate". Cars which get better than 6.5L/100km get a $1000 rebate, and gas guzzlers get an extra tax.

This is another way to handle it. Better than CAFE. It's a bit more like carbon trading, because the gas guzzlers are "buying" carbon credits from fuel efficient vehicles. One could stretch this to the point where... "You want to buy an Escalade? Fine, no problem, but you'll be buying one small car to give to somebody else to drive."

Funnily, the Yaris will get the rebate, and the Fit misses it by 0.1
 
Suckman69 said:
Anticipate what a reasonable fuel economy range for the average passenger vehicle is. Then take the top 10% of fuel consumers and charge the manufacturer the usual gas-guzzler tax, and take that tax and offer it as a rebate for the top 10% of fuel misers. Vinegar if you do "bad" and honey if you do "good". :)
Great just what the US needs, ANOTHER tiered tax structure that involves excess tax, rebates, clamed forms, administration etc… All because it feels good and does not seem to hurt the poor and it taxes the rich etc.. etc… etc…

Just friggan impose a national gas tax that is like that of most countries. If you don’t want to shock people and hurt the poor phaze it in over a 4 -5 year period, each year raising it by say 20-25cents a gallon. That would give people a chance to cope with the rise in fuel prices and allow people to plan on buying more efficient cars the next time around. They could even use the “extra” money over the phaze in period to stabilize gas prices. Fix the selling price of gas at say $3a gallon during the tax phaze in. When it is cheaper the US government takes in tax money, and when it is higher they subsidize it a little bit. At the end of the phaze in period have the US arrive at say $5 or so a US gallon, BAN tolls on highways (except in congested areas to completely discourage road use and encourage people onto a well developed public transit system)

This extra gas tax would be compensated by lowering other taxes that people pay such as say federal income tax by the amount the new higher gas tax takes in. All money from the gas tax would be fully marked to ONLY transportation funds and spending.

I am so tired of all these ridiculous plans states have to tax car use per mile, have Ezpass (electronic toll collections, etc to discourage people from driving and raise funds for the highways. Just friggan raise the dam gas tax and skip the billion dollars in bureaucratic administration and info structure all other systems require.
 
rpvitiello said:
Great just what the US needs, ANOTHER tiered tax structure that involves excess tax, rebates, clamed forms, administration etc… All because it feels good and does not seem to hurt the poor and it taxes the rich etc.. etc… etc…
Rebates?
Claim forms?
Administration?
I am talking about taxes and incentives straight to the manufacturer. How many new model cars come out every year? :rolleyes: Its extremely simple. All vehicles, which includes SUVs are tested the same... thats simpler. And all taxes collected for gas guzzlers that are already EPA tested anyway are directly put into a fund to be dispersed for vehicles that are fuel misers, resulting in a zero dollar net change to keep the government honest. Theres already plenty of tax in gas, the average citizen pays plenty for gas already, and commercial vehicles (actual work trucks and such) don't need to be hurt even more to effect a positive honey/vinegar incentive system. Plus you NEVER stop talking about how high your income taxes are compared to other places in the US and how your money suffers from localized inflation... so I guess I can see where you're coming from. ;)
 
This extra gas tax would be compensated by lowering other taxes that people pay such as say federal income tax by the amount the new higher gas tax takes in. All money from the gas tax would be fully marked to ONLY transportation funds and spending.
Hey, now you're copying my plan! ;)

Yeah, what they're doing in Canada is reasonable trouble free, no forms or anything. I think it's all handled at the dealer level.
 
1 - 20 of 31 Posts