marshall banana - 06 November 2009 12:34 PM

notscottspeed - 06 November 2009 12:10 AM

I don't want the profits to go back to the far east...

They don't, they go to the company's shareholders. Do you have a mutual fund that invests parts of its capital outside of the US? In all likelihood, then you, like me, have shares in Toyota and Honda...

Profits? What profits?

No one is really making money in the car business.

This year. Although Honda is in the black, but much of that is due to motorcycle sales in the developing world...

auntysquat - 05 November 2009 07:08 PM

It happens because the other people have gone out and forgotten to close the door, leaving behind a huge mess that somebody else has to clean up.

You seem to conveniently forget that many of those "left to clean up the mess" are the same idiots that voted for the insane legislation over the last twenty years that created the mess. And who will be cleaning up the future mess of the legislation passed in the last 11 months in the "spirit of change"?? Perhaps your kids and grandkids, perhaps the next several generations.
Clyde
Clyde

gary243 - 05 November 2009 09:42 PM

Lovey-Dovey - 05 November 2009 09:19 PM

Okay, I get your point. But why not a US built stipulation? The whole point was to put US workers back to work.

I hate to continue this thread which was based on a totally bogus story.

But clunkers was never intended to help auto workers (there were other bailouts for that). It was mainly targeted towards dealers, regardless of make, to clear out inventory that was sitting idle.

And to replace low-MPG cars with fuel efficient cars for environmental reasons.

(I'm not defending it, didn't support it for many reasons. Just explaining.)

Yep. Gotta remember that auto factories are in few places, but dealers are everywhere. And dealers are some of THE biggest advertisers in ANY local market (with all its follow on effects). So more Congressmen were interested in helping dealers than the assembly plants themselves.

sloggie - 05 November 2009 08:23 PM

fbx22 - 05 November 2009 07:14 PM

marshall banana - 05 November 2009 07:10 PM

You can't fault them for asking how effective that $250 million is, advertising-wise...

Well like I said when this all began. I think pulling out of racing would actually do more harm than good. There are still quite a few race fans who do buy based upon racing sponsorship. If they cut and ran from nascar or other racing I actually think it would just add to their problem of dwindling car sales. Obviously win on sunday sell on monday is nothing like it was in the 60s 70s and 80s but Im just guessing that manufacturers still get a hefty bit of their sales from auto racing advertisement

This is a joke right? I don't know anyone who buys a Chevy Impala or a Toyota Camry because of NASCAR. Hell, 99.99% of the folks I know don't even know what model the Chevy is supposed to be.

I am like you, but evidently there are a decent number of people who aren't. You've got NASCAR fans who will determine which cereal, beer, detergent (etc.) they will buy depending upon whether they are associated with drivers they like or hate.

marshall banana - 06 November 2009 12:34 PM

notscottspeed - 06 November 2009 12:10 AM

I don't want the profits to go back to the far east...

They don't, they go to the company's shareholders. Do you have a mutual fund that invests parts of its capital outside of the US? In all likelihood, then you, like me, have shares in Toyota and Honda...

c'mon, now... you don't really think the largest % of shareholders are Americans living in North America do you??? puh-leeze...
not to mention the amount of those stateside profits that have been re-invested in American Industry & real estate

All the manufacturers should pull out of direct competition and instead just sponsor one team(ie. f1). You would actually get more exposure with the car all decked out in your manufacturers colors. The COT doesn't represent anything on the road today anyway, it is a NASCAR design.. Just called it the NASCAR sprint cup car or what ever the series sponsor is. You can be pretty sure Hendrick would be 'Team GM' and roush would be 'Team Ford'.


Currently, imo, it is a waste of money for the manufacturers because the car doesn't resemble anything on the road and it doesn't display the companies technologies. Hell, all they have is a 6 inch decal on the front of the car. That is not worth the $200 million a year.

ALMS kicks NASCAR and F1's butt when it comes to displaying actual technology they can transfer to a production car. They can race in that series at a tenth of the cost. If the ALMS were to take a chance and become more popular they would run a couple ovals year... Imagine Charlotte with 3 classes on at once? wow. Seeing the prototypes on an oval would be very cool and the thundering Vettes too.

Yarboroughfan - 06 November 2009 01:31 PM

speedsense - 06 November 2009 03:23 AM

Hate to be the bearer of more bad news... but the congress bill (passed the house on it's way to the Senate next week) on Cap and Trade will be a racing killer. All of the racing will be affected by this bill.
Think the stimulus was bad, this one will knock racing into the dirt.
Racing will become twice to three times (or more) as expensive if this thing passes.

would you happen to know the name of that bill.. perhaps have a link to anything on it? You've piqued my curiosity.. I'd like to know what you're talking about.

try here http://www.nationalcenter.org/NPA570.html
and here
http://www.heritage.org (under enviroment)

The bill is called Cap and Trade, and it effects everybody, especially racing....

notscottspeed - 07 November 2009 10:44 PM

marshall banana - 06 November 2009 12:34 PM

notscottspeed - 06 November 2009 12:10 AM

I don't want the profits to go back to the far east...

They don't, they go to the company's shareholders. Do you have a mutual fund that invests parts of its capital outside of the US? In all likelihood, then you, like me, have shares in Toyota and Honda...

c'mon, now... you don't really think the largest % of shareholders are Americans living in North America do you??? puh-leeze...
not to mention the amount of those stateside profits that have been re-invested in American Industry & real estate

In Toyota's case, it's the Toyoda family, followed by institutional investors I would suspect. In Honda's case, I genuinely am not sure who does. But the argument that the profits are re-invested in the US for American companies is utterly silly. Who were GM shareholders, and where did things get reinvested? The claim you're making is a vague hope, but not an accurate reflection of factual reality. Welcome to globalization. Profits from everything go everwhere. As do the jobs...

I understand globalization is a Beeeotch... and we're get B-slapped...
How much is Toyota and Honda each worth??? how much of their business over the last 50 years has come from the U S? then, tell me their profits don't go back to Tokyo... that's not 'vague hope'... that's reality... you've been drinking their kool-aid, Marshall...