The continuing Cash for Clunkers saga...

I will say this-the low end salvage yards should be filled with a lot better cars than they were before.

Xceler8x wrote: This program is definitely a shot in the arm for the auto industry. I heard on Marketplace that the dealers are on schedule to sell as many cars this year as they did just a few years ago. In this recession economy that's incredible. This may be the way they clear out all the left over inventory we saw sitting around in the spring. Keeping our auto industry in the black is a good thing.

I agree. Well, sort of.

On the surface what you said is true. But the bigger questions might be, "Is it a LONG TERM shot in the arm for the auto industry", and,"Is it a shot in the arm for the auto industry's ability to move forward, creating jobs and sustainable business?".

I'm not as sure for those two questions.

The program will succeed in moving old inventory. That SHOULD be good. Getting old inventory off the books is a good idea. But it may not create jobs, in fact it could hurt jobs. If a huge number of people who need to buy a new auto in the next 3 years run out and buy one from leftover inventory with this incentive, will they ALSO buy another new one later? Will jobs be created to build new cars if the demand for new cars has already been met?

I think it will relieve the pent-up demand for new cars, but REDUCE the demand for the next couple of years.

Additionally, adding this much material into the recycler's inventories will help their sales short term, but it will flood the market with cheap recycled steel, which will be purchased by China, India, and other countries interested in producing low cost automobiles that compete with our automakers for market share. That could turn into a net loss as well.

SVreX wrote: Additionally, adding this much material into the recycler's inventories will help their sales short term, but it will flood the market with cheap recycled steel, which will be purchased by China, India, and other countries interested in producing low cost automobiles that compete with our automakers for market share. That could turn into a net loss as well.

for this, I think you are way overselling the impact on the gross market. While it does help the little guy for a little while, the net impact of the 250,000 cars isn't a lot vs. the 12M or so that get taken off the road annually. Once that ramps to 1M, then it will be more significant.

Travis_K wrote: . This is just my opinion and I do not mean to offend anyone, but I think is it really a shame to destroy a rare car like a 164ls just because it makes better financial sense. I know how much work and money it takes to keep a car like that on the road, snd if saving money was the goal, there are other cars that would perform the same function and cost thousands of dollars less to drive and maintain over the life of the car.

There's a difference between rare and special. Special would mean someone wants the car so that they can maintain it. Rare just means that the numbers are small.

I, too, know how much money it takes to keep the car on the road. I also know when it becomes not worth it. On top of that, when good ones don't sell for $2500, it's far from a special car.

If you want to buy it- shoot me an e-mail. $3500, non negotiable, as is. We've owned the car for 14 years now, so it's not like she's not had her chance in the sun- and we have owned it for most of the life of the car. It's an interesting reality when the owner of the car parks it vs. a modern CUV.

I'm sure that there's a fair number of people in similar boats. Just time to move on.

E-

The Chevy commercial where they say "let us recycle your vehicle for you" just rubs me the wrong way.

alfadriver wrote: for this, I think you are way overselling the impact on the gross market. While it does help the little guy for a little while, the net impact of the 250,000 cars isn't a lot vs. the 12M or so that get taken off the road annually. Once that ramps to 1M, then it will be more significant.

Agreed.

But the 250,000 number was for the $1 billion stimulus. It is looking very likely now that the amount will be $3 billion. That would be 750,000 cars...

...which is getting much closer to 1M.

Gimp wrote: The Chevy commercial where they say "let us recycle your vehicle for you" just rubs me the wrong way.

Or the Toyota commercial where they basically have a catoon of an old Landcruiser being crushed. I hate all the Cash for Clunkers commercials.

If I had $3500 and it would make it back here I probably would buy it. But, id have a hard time even coming up with $2k to buy another car. I guess thats the main reason i dsilike the whole thing, becasue people are scrapping so many perfectly good cars that i wouldnt even be able to afford to buy. The people i bought my milano from actually have a perfect 164LS sitting at their house, but they dont like it for some reason so they never use it. I guess $800 every 30k miles for a timing belt change is kinda expensive.

I have owned a turbo dodge, so I understand the different between rare and desirable (many of the desireable turbo dodge models had productions numbers in the hundreds).

Travis_K wrote: If I had $3500 and it would make it back here I probably would buy it. But, id have a hard time even coming up with $2k to buy another car. I guess thats the main reason i dsilike the whole thing, becasue people are scrapping so many perfectly good cars that i wouldnt even be able to afford to buy. The people i bought my milano from actually have a perfect 164LS sitting at their house, but they dont like it for some reason so they never use it. I guess $800 every 30k miles for a timing belt change is kinda expensive. I have owned a turbo dodge, so I understand the different between rare and desirable (many of the desireable turbo dodge models had productions numbers in the hundreds).

There's one for sale for $2500 somewhere out west.

Like I said in a post before, this progam is harder on this board than most others, just as you say. But sometimes you have to put your money where your mouth is. You have the choice of $1000 belt changes or $5000 engine rebuilds. Right now, two belt changes are almost the value of the car.

Oh, and it's an automatic. Which, if ever dies, costs at least $5k to change.

Basically, all things considered, it's almost better to let it die, and save far more worthy vehicles. This is a saab 9000 with an Alfa V6. One that has been surpassed by the base 3.0l Camry motor just about 10 years ago in terms of performance. It's just not that special.

E-

This program could greatly benefit a lot of people. If you had an older vehicle that was poorly maintained, with high mileage or needed some significant and expensive repairs or just otherwise was difficult to sell it sure would be easy to unload it in the CFC program. Provided you can/want to buy a new car.

alfadriver wrote:

Travis_K wrote: If I had $3500 and it would make it back here I probably would buy it. But, id have a hard time even coming up with $2k to buy another car. I guess thats the main reason i dsilike the whole thing, becasue people are scrapping so many perfectly good cars that i wouldnt even be able to afford to buy. The people i bought my milano from actually have a perfect 164LS sitting at their house, but they dont like it for some reason so they never use it. I guess $800 every 30k miles for a timing belt change is kinda expensive. I have owned a turbo dodge, so I understand the different between rare and desirable (many of the desireable turbo dodge models had productions numbers in the hundreds).

There's one for sale for $2500 somewhere out west. Like I said in a post before, this progam is harder on this board than most others, just as you say. But sometimes you have to put your money where your mouth is. You have the choice of $1000 belt changes or $5000 engine rebuilds. Right now, two belt changes are almost the value of the car. Oh, and it's an automatic. Which, if ever dies, costs at least $5k to change. Basically, all things considered, it's almost better to let it die, and save far more worthy vehicles. This is a saab 9000 with an Alfa V6. One that has been surpassed by the base 3.0l Camry motor just about 10 years ago in terms of performance. It's just not that special. E-

So how much E?

There are many ways to avoid a time bomb from going off but the easiest is to remove the bomb.

I traded a clean bodied but poorly kept 1992 Camaro through CARS for my 2008 Astra. I got $3500 for the Camaro.

When I sat down and figured how much it would cost to fix the car (which included an engine rebuild, a suspension rebuild, and a transmission rebuild), I was floored. It would have cost about $5000 to keep that car on the road in presentable condition. Keep in mind that I'm not currently capable of engine or transmission rebuilds, so that work would have been done in a shop.

The Astra won't cost us that much over the next whole year.

Additionally, my wife and I use the car for client visits. Crappy cars don't present well, so sales were low for us. The Astra lets us present better, drive farther, and use less fuel doing it.

The local Hyundai Dealer actually called me today to remind me that my Cherokee was eligible for the Cash for Clunkers Program. I told her I really wasn't interested in paying $400 a month for something that wouldn't tow my boat and haul my four large dogs.

Then I read this....

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_cash_for_clunkers

I should have asked her what would happen if the Senate refused to allocate more money for the program. Would I still get $4,500 for my Jeep or would I be screwed.

Snowdoggie wrote: The local Hyundai Dealer actually called me today to remind me that my Cherokee was eligible for the Cash for Clunkers Program. I told her I really wasn't interested in paying $400 a month for something that wouldn't tow my boat and haul my four large dogs. Then I read this.... http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_cash_for_clunkers I should have asked her what would happen if the Senate refused to allocate more money for the program. Would I still get $4,500 for my Jeep or would I be screwed.

Every picture I see in the media of the CFC program it always seems to include a Jeep Cherokee in it. Must have been a popular model. OK, I'll say it. I sure wouldn't mind picking up a cheap one for a winter/beater vehicle.

JmfnB wrote: So how much E? There are many ways to avoid a time bomb from going off but the easiest is to remove the bomb.

Assuming an old gmail account is current- check your e-mail.

Datsun1500 wrote: This is going to hurt the value of cars as a whole. You can buy a 2010 Corolla for $11,000 after the $4500 if you trade a $100 clunker. 2009 Corollas were going through the auction for $13,300 last month. They will be dropping to $10,000 this month and a lot of people will be stuck.

And????

I personally think that used Toyotas are WAAAY over valued for what you get. Especially if LAST MONTH someone paid $13k fully knowing that the CARS program was coming- that was a pretty poor buy if you ask me. If you over pay for a used car in May, June, or July, fully knowing that CARS was coming- shame on you.

Feedyurhed wrote: This program could greatly benefit a lot of people. If you had an older vehicle that was poorly maintained, with high mileage or needed some significant and expensive repairs or just otherwise was difficult to sell it sure would be easy to unload it in the CFC program. Provided you can/want to buy a new car.

A Co-worker was in this very scenario. He arrived at work today with a Pontiac G6. He paid $11k for it after all the rebates. He got $9500 off the car before negotiations began. His payment is just over $100/month.

His previous car was a '98 2WD Grand Cherokee. It needed new brakes all round, new tires, new shocks, and had 130k on the odometer. His truck qualified for the full Clunker payment of $4500.

The Cash for Clunkers program is for the economy what sugar is to your system. It tastes good and speeds up the metabolism for a short time, but in the long run your metabolism, or the economy will slow down again to an even lower level than before you ate the sugar.

What will car sales be like next year without a government program to juice the system? Consider the fact that everybody in the auto industry is counting on a nice big price increase to improve profitablilty.

Also consider the fact that we borrowed the money to juice the system from China and at some point your taxes will have to go up to pay this all back with interest.

Datsun1500 wrote:

alfadriver wrote:

Datsun1500 wrote: This is going to hurt the value of cars as a whole. You can buy a 2010 Corolla for $11,000 after the $4500 if you trade a $100 clunker. 2009 Corollas were going through the auction for $13,300 last month. They will be dropping to $10,000 this month and a lot of people will be stuck.

And???? I personally think that used Toyotas are WAAAY over valued for what you get. Especially if LAST MONTH someone paid $13k fully knowing that the CARS program was coming- that was a pretty poor buy if you ask me. If you over pay for a used car in May, June, or July, fully knowing that CARS was coming- shame on you.

It will hurt values as a whole, no matter when you bought them, even if you bought it new within the last few years. Use a Honda Odyssey as an example (using round numbers) In 2007 you could buy a Honda Odyssey that had a sticker of $30K for $27K, that car would be worth about $17K now. 3 months ago an 09 Odyssey that stickered for $30K could be bought for $27K making the 07 a good deal for $17K since that would be $10K lees then a new one. Now that 09 can be bought for $22,500 as long as you have a $100 clunker, making the 07 only $5500 off, not a good deal, therefore your 2007 is now worth less then it was before the program.

It all depends on IF you have a clunker available. If you do not, then the 2007 at $17 is still a good deal. If you do, then it may not be. How can a vehicle be bought for $22.5k if you don't have a clunker? It's valued based on what you have- so the example isn't quite valid.

Besides, a $27k car bought in 2007 pays more than a $27k in 2009 based on the value of a $. So just the fact that the actual purchase price has not changed in 2 years makes the 2007 a worse deal.

E-

Snowdoggie wrote: Also consider the fact that we borrowed the money to juice the system from China and at some point your taxes will have to go up to pay this all back with interest.

The thing about the tax part is how quickly it gets recycled.

Right away, a lot of the benefit gets back to state coffers via sales tax. Then theres the taxes on profts from the dealers and the OEM's. Then there's the income tax for all those who had to work extra producing the cars (which is actually happening) + the income tax for the workers who are recycling the materials (again, happening).

Since the voucher is a percentage of the cost, it may not be too long before all of the money is recycled back into the system via the various other tax systems.

And we won't even count the claims of reduced oil usage, which cuts the burden to the country over time.

Based on personal savings rates, less than 20% of all the money spent will go into long term savings- the rest gets cycled- and enough cycling, and the borrowed spending is paid for.

I agree about the long term thing- this is a small shot in the arm. But for some of us, that's all we need to survive the downturn.

E-

Snowdoggie wrote: The Cash for Clunkers program is for the economy what sugar is to your system. It tastes good and speeds up the metabolism for a short time, but in the long run your metabolism, or the economy will slow down again to an even lower level than before you ate the sugar.

Or you could say that this program provides the needed capital to cash strapped organizations to alow them to build more fuel efficent/desireable models, keep plants open, people employed, and suppliers from going belly up.

Surely having companies remain solvent in the near term so they can become a long term going concern isn't that what you describe..

(just playing devils advocate)

Mg is just gm backwards anyways.... http://www.28dayslater.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=10566&highlight=longbridge http://www.28dayslater.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=12814&highlight=longbridge http://www.28dayslater.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=9749&highlight=longbridge http://www.28dayslater.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=9321&highlight=longbridge http://www.28dayslater.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=7975&highlight=longbridge http://www.28dayslater.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=9760&highlight=longbridge

ignorant wrote:

Snowdoggie wrote: The Cash for Clunkers program is for the economy what sugar is to your system. It tastes good and speeds up the metabolism for a short time, but in the long run your metabolism, or the economy will slow down again to an even lower level than before you ate the sugar.

Or you could say that this program provides the needed capital to cash strapped organizations to alow them to build more fuel efficent/desireable models, keep plants open, people employed, and suppliers from going belly up. Surely having companies remain solvent in the near term so they can become a long term going concern isn't that what you describe.. (just playing devils advocate) Mg is just gm backwards anyways.... http://www.28dayslater.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=10566&highlight=longbridge http://www.28dayslater.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=12814&highlight=longbridge http://www.28dayslater.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=9749&highlight=longbridge http://www.28dayslater.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=9321&highlight=longbridge http://www.28dayslater.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=7975&highlight=longbridge http://www.28dayslater.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=9760&highlight=longbridge

I think it's called kicking the can down the road.

The whole program just makes me sick to my stomach..and its not only some of the vehicals being killed, and well that kills me on so many levels.. the other is just the waste of money that is happening. the direction this goerment is heading scares the crap out of me and nothing i have seen them do has convinced me they know what they are doing nor have i seen a single thing to improve with all the money they are dumping.

ignorant wrote:

Snowdoggie wrote: The Cash for Clunkers program is for the economy what sugar is to your system. It tastes good and speeds up the metabolism for a short time, but in the long run your metabolism, or the economy will slow down again to an even lower level than before you ate the sugar.

Or you could say that this program provides the needed capital to cash strapped organizations to alow them to build more fuel efficent/desireable models, keep plants open, people employed, and suppliers from going belly up. Surely having companies remain solvent in the near term so they can become a long term going concern isn't that what you describe.. (just playing devils advocate) Mg is just gm backwards anyways.... http://www.28dayslater.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=10566&highlight=longbridge http://www.28dayslater.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=12814&highlight=longbridge http://www.28dayslater.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=9749&highlight=longbridge http://www.28dayslater.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=9321&highlight=longbridge http://www.28dayslater.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=7975&highlight=longbridge http://www.28dayslater.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=9760&highlight=longbridge

Wow.................those are some wild (and creepy) pics. Good job to who ever took them.

It would appear that at least the majority of the new cars being traded for are more fuel efficient.

The Top Ten Cash for Clunkers Trade-Ins:

1. 1998 Ford Explorer

2. 1997 Ford Explorer

3. 1996 Ford Explorer

4. 1999 Ford Explorer

5. Jeep Grand Cherokee

6. Jeep Cherokee

7. 1995 Ford Explorer

8. 1994 Ford Explorer

9. 1997 Ford Windstar

10. 1999 Dodge Caravan

The Top Ten Cash for Clunkers New Cars:

1. Ford Focus

2. Honda Civic

3. Toyota Corolla

4. Toyota Prius

5. Ford Escape

6. Toyota Camry

7. Dodge Caliber

8. Hyundai Elantra

9. Honda Fit

10. Chevy Cobalt