Cash for Clunkers Program
Do you guys know about this? have questions?
The official rules will be delivered the 24th, but I have a rough understanding of how this is going to work. Up to $4500 for taking your gas guzzler off the road and buying an efficient car begins this Friday.
info here
mpg ratings here
linkto a
pdf of the actual law
So my last car, an '82 Buick Century, isn't eligible. It was too old.
I just wanted to say that that's dumb. It's exactly the kind of car that should be taken off the roads. Well, I suppose full size vans, trucks, and SUV are worse.
What are they going to do with these clunkers? Melt them down?
they have to be crushed. engines and drivetrains may not be parted out, but other bits an pieces may.
They're smart that you have to prove you've had the car for a year. Otherwise people would be buying clunkers just for the trade in potential.
Exactly Glatt. I was skeptical, but those two points answer a lot for me. I was saying to J, what, you can go on Craigslist, buy a $500 beater, and get $4500 for it? OK, no you can't.
This is the part that concerns me:
Program runs through Nov 1, 2009 or when the funds are exhausted, whichever comes first.
ok....so...like....how do you know when they run out of money? it's going to take a few weeks for the dealer to get paid after the deal is done..... scary
So you just repossess the cars, right? If the buyer won't pay you back?
So my last car, an '82 Buick Century, isn't eligible. It was too old.
I just wanted to say that that's dumb. It's exactly the kind of car that should be taken off the roads.
Oh the irony...:eyebrow:
What are they going to do with these clunkers? Melt them down?
Same thing they would do to that car if you traded it in - scrap it for spare parts.
Drove a newer version of that same car in the early 1990s. It was all over the road. Even my 1980 Honda Accord in that same month was more stable. Keeping that car on the road was a tribute to the mechanic and the attention of its driver at all times.
Makes no sense to buy a clunker when its very design makes it all but amazing it is still one the road. Would you melt down a miracle?
The most over priced cars:
http://www.forbes.com/2009/07/01/overpriced-cars-autos-lifestyle-vehicles-overpriced_slide_2.html?partner=yahooautos
I can't believe the Wrangler and Liberty are on the list but the Commander isn't... and they have the Wrangler msrp at $28,000 but they start at less than $22,000. Hmmm.
I didn't go to the link yet to read it because I'm in a rush, but I watched the session in Congress on CSPAN when they first passed it in committee, and it is a bad bill. First of all, you have to buy a new car, you can't get a used one. Second, if you're getting rid of a gas guzzling SUV, you only have to buy a new one that gets ONE MORE MPG, and if it's a car, FOUR MORE MPG. That is seriously fucked up. If they were going to do it, it should have been for much better gas mileage, and you should be able to get a used car. This is just another giveaway to the auto companies.
Dianne Feinstein and Olympia Snow were working on a much better bill. I hope some of their ideas got incorporated into this one before it passed the full Congress.
Second, if you're getting rid of a gas guzzling SUV, you only have to buy a new one that gets ONE MORE MPG, and if it's a car, FOUR MORE MPG.
Remember what those who would pervert any soluton want. More SUVs. Why does an SUV have a large engine compartment? Then the world's crappiest cars can still use 1968 technology engines. Then the vehicle need not be an 'integrated' design.
Congress is a cross section of many opinions. Some want vehicles that even a bean counter could design. That is an SUV - designed by bean counters - no innovations - 1968 technology engines. SUV have minimal engineering and exemptions from many design and safety requirements.
I didn't go to the link yet to read it because I'm in a rush, but I watched the session in Congress on CSPAN when they first passed it in committee, and it is a bad bill. First of all, you have to buy a new car, you can't get a used one. Second, if you're getting rid of a gas guzzling SUV, you only have to buy a new one that gets ONE MORE MPG, and if it's a car, FOUR MORE MPG. That is seriously fucked up. If they were going to do it, it should have been for much better gas mileage, and you should be able to get a used car. This is just another giveaway to the auto companies.
Dianne Feinstein and Olympia Snow were working on a much better bill. I hope some of their ideas got incorporated into this one before it passed the full Congress.
paraphrasing:
'i didn't read the link, but i DID want to misquote some information'
[COLOR="White"](mean comment deleted before posting)[/COLOR]
The value of the credit for the purchase or lease of a new passenger car depends upon the difference between the combined fuel economy of the vehicle that is traded in and that of the new vehicle that is purchased or leased. If the new vehicle has a combined fuel economy that is at least 4, but less than 10, miles per gallon higher than the traded-in vehicle, the credit is $3,500. If the new vehicle has a combined fuel economy value that is at least 10 miles per gallon higher than the traded-in vehicle, the credit is $4,500.
it really depends on what you think the objective of the action is. I think it will definitely stimulate some sales. it will have a minor positive effect on emissions, too. what is more important today?
So my last car, an '82 Buick Century, isn't eligible.
That looks just like mine Glatt. And mine is a 92'
yeah, you're right. I did a Google image search and came up with that picture. I didn't have a picture of mine handy. I don't think the picture is an '82. The lights look different, and mine had a padded vinyl top.
This is an '82 and is much closer to the way mine looked. Good comfortable car for road trips, but that's about it. A POS otherwise.
paraphrasing:
'i didn't read the link, but i DID want to misquote some information'
[COLOR="White"](mean comment deleted before posting)[/COLOR]
AS I SAID, I was quoting WHAT I HEARD while watching the bill go through committee. THEN I WENT ON TO SAY...
Dianne Feinstein and Olympia Snow were working on a much better bill. I hope some of their ideas got incorporated into this one before it passed the full Congress.Geez. :rolleyes:
i was just pointing out that you're stupid.
i was just pointing out that you're stupid.
Do you enjoy being an asshole or is it just a gift?
sometimes it's both.
understand my perspective. I put up a thread because I'm in the car business, and thought people might want to find out about this program. I offered to answer questions.
Why did you find it necessary to post your incorrect opinion as though it were fact even though i had linked the actual information and offered to clarify any questions?
didn't have enough time to read the link.....you were in a rush? and yet you had time to post incorrect information, and the judgement that this is a bad program.
you're like a stupid version of Aliantha. jesus.
This is a chart I remember seeing as well. In fact, I think I posted it somewhere, although it may have been on another site.
Cash For Clunkers – Car Allowance Rebate System Overview
Summary of Car Allowance Rebate System - Cash for Clunkers Voucher Qualifications
Min. Fuel Economy for New Vehicle $3,500 Voucher $4,500 Voucher
Passenger Car 22 mpg *
Mileage improvement of at least 4 mpg - $3,500 Voucher Mileage improvement of at least 10 mpg - $4,500
Light-Duty Truck ** 18 mpg * Mileage improvement of at least 2 mpg - $3,500 Voucher Mileage improvement of at least 5 mpg - $4,500
Large Light-Duty Trucks *** 15 mpg *
Mileage improvement of at least 1 mpg - $3,500 Voucher or trade-in of a work truck Mileage improvement of at least 2 mpg - $4,500
Commercial trucks ****
Trade-in must be at least pre-2002
http://www.cashforclunkersfacts.com/
I believe that is what I said?
yeah, you're right. I did a Google image search and came up with that picture. I didn't have a picture of mine handy. I don't think the picture is an '82. The lights look different, and mine had a padded vinyl top.
This is an '82 and is much closer to the way mine looked. Good comfortable car for road trips, but that's about it. A POS otherwise.
Glatt, whats the deal with that picture? It looks like it could be out of a Cohen brothers movie...:p
sometimes it's both.
understand my perspective. I put up a thread because I'm in the car business, and thought people might want to find out about this program. I offered to answer questions.
Why did you find it necessary to post your incorrect opinion as though it were fact even though i had linked the actual information and offered to clarify any questions?
didn't have enough time to read the link.....you were in a rush? and yet you had time to post incorrect information, and the judgement that this is a bad program.
you're like a stupid version of Aliantha. jesus.
According to the chart I just posted, I wasn't wrong AT ALL in the requirments I posted. Even according to the link you provided, I wasn't wrong. And I
specifically said I had not read the link YET because I was in a hurry (I have now read the link), and that I was going by what I had I seen
in committee.
I am happy you were posting something to help people who might be in the market for a new car. Good for you. I STILL think the bill Feinstein and Snow were working on would have better because it would have benefited more people. Not everyone can afford a new car right now, but many people who can't might could afford a used one. Why is it taboo to say so?
Fargo!
Tan Ciera! Tan Ciera!
:lol:
THIS IS WHAT YOU SAID:
I didn't go to the link yet to read it because I'm in a rush, but I watched the session in Congress on CSPAN when they first passed it in committee, and it is a bad bill. First of all, you have to buy a new car, you can't get a used one. [COLOR="Red"]Second, if you're getting rid of a gas guzzling SUV, you only have to buy a new one that gets ONE MORE MPG, and if it's a car, FOUR MORE MPG.[/COLOR] BLAH BLAH BLAH.
An SUV is like JEEP.....a Class 2 Truck is like an F350
most people here don't drive heavy pickups
(3) the term `category 2 truck' means a large van or a large
pickup, as categorized by the Secretary using the method used
by the Environmental Protection Agency and described in the
report entitled `Light-Duty Automotive Technology and Fuel
Economy Trends: 1975 through 2008';
you do this repeatedly. i've told you about it before. you form an opinion in a blink and then immediately begin to spout it as fact. I don't want you to do that in this thread if you wouldn't mind.
Fargo!
Tan Ciera! Tan Ciera!
:lol:
bwahahahahahaa
Looks like lumberjim has found himself a new whipping boy(girl).
Lucky you sugarpop.
THIS IS WHAT YOU SAID:
I didn't go to the link yet to read it because I'm in a rush, but I watched the session in Congress on CSPAN when they first passed it in committee, and it is a bad bill. First of all, you have to buy a new car, you can't get a used one. Second, if you're getting rid of a gas guzzling SUV, you only have to buy a new one that gets [COLOR="Red"]ONE MORE MPG, and if it's a car, FOUR MORE MPG.[/COLOR]
you do this repeatedly. i've told you about it before. you form an opinion in a blink and then immediately begin to spout it as fact. I don't want you to do that in this thread if you wouldn't mind.
This is the last thing I will post about this. This is from the FAQs page from the link you posted:
If both the new vehicle and the traded-in vehicle are
category 2 trucks and the combined
fuel economy value of the new vehicle is at least 1, but less than 2, miles per gallon higher than the combined fuel economy value of the traded in vehicle, the credit is $3,500. If both the new vehicle and the traded-in vehicle are category 2 trucks and the combined fuel economy of the new vehicle is at least 2 miles per gallon higher than that of the traded-in vehicle, the credit is $4,500.
The value of the credit for the purchase or lease of a new
passenger car depends upon the difference between the combined fuel economy of the vehicle that is traded in and that of the new vehicle that is purchased or leased. If the new vehicle has a combined
fuel economy that is at least 4, but less than 10,
miles per gallon higher than the traded-in vehicle, the credit is $3,500. If the new vehicle has a combined fuel economy value that is at least 10 miles per gallon higher than the traded-in vehicle, the credit is $4,500.
Looks like lumberjim has found himself a new whipping boy(girl).
Lucky you sugarpop.
yea. Lucky me.
yea. Lucky me.
Don't worry, you are not the first, nor will you be the last.
LJ, how's it going for you? Has this Cash for Clunkers program boosted your business? It's been almost a week.
been too busy to read the cellar.
i'm off today, but i have to get shit done around here too.
we've done 20 C4C deals since Friday. The claims process is daunting. Guess who gets to deal with that nightmare.... We have to scan a shit ton of documents, and fill out multiple page forms on the site, submit the claim, then go back in and submit the scrap certificate.....etc.
plus, we're freaking jamming busy all day. no time no time
I didn't think of that. We, too, get to bear the brunt of new government programs. It's like "here's what WE'RE gonna do...it's gonna be freaking GREAT. Now, YOU figure out the nightmare of administering it within our sketchy and complicated regulations. Guidance? You don't need no stinkin' guidance."
Hang in there!
plus, we're freaking jamming busy all day. no time no time
BUT, that's better than the alternative. ;)
This is the part that concerns me:
ok....so...like....how do you know when they run out of money? it's going to take a few weeks for the dealer to get paid after the deal is done..... scary
There's a cash-left-ometer on the page you linked to. Currently at $858M
The meter is probably approved claims, I wonder how much is in the pipeline?
it is a bad bill. First of all, you have to buy a new car, you can't get a used one.
Why does that make it bad? it's only very recently that manufacturers here have really been attempting to reduce the MPG, so a new car is likely to be more fuel efficient than a used one. Also, surely, we're only guessing at the MPG of a used car. Which is fine if you're getting rid of a probable gas-guzzler, but to be certain you're replacing it with something significantly more efficient surely it needs to be new which a known mpg? I suspect if the scheme were opened up to used cars, there would be much shennanigans afoot.
Also, you poo-poo the 1mpg improvement required for trucks, and yet if they are only getting 15mpg, that's 6.7% which is not insignificant. Plus clunkers are probably getting far less than that which of course increases that percentage. From what I could tell from the tables linked to in the OP, the mpg for these vehicles does not appear to have improved that much. I would say it's pretty safe to assume that most of these vehicles are on the road because either (a) they are needed for what they are used for -in which case if they are replaced it's going to be with much the same thing which is going to be impossible if you make the required mpg change much higher, or (b) they are vanity vehicles in which case their owners likely have more money than sense and are not likely to be interested in replacing them with smaller vehicles for a few grand discount -which is the only way you'll get a bigger mpg reduction. So although it doesn't sound much, maybe it's the best that can be realistically effective, and is enough that it's better than nothing? I agree that on the surface 1mpg seems like a measly figure, but i think it's a knee-jerk reaction to dismiss it out of hand. 1% is often insignificant, 1 elephant is usually not. It's all relative. and I could be stupid.
. . .
as an addendum, I may not have Jim's finesse, but I do agree that it's somewhat rude to post that you don't have time to read the link but then take the time to give your opinion on what you think it probably says, especially when your opinion -valid though it may be- is about the worth of the program and not it's workings, which was the point of the OP. It's almost trolling. You're not the only one who does it by a long way, but I generally expect better given the usual quality of your posts. Just sayin'
The meter is probably approved claims, I wonder how much is in the pipeline?
If it's approved claims, then they must be going through pretty quickly. I reckon it might be submitted claims.
Plenty of people post their opinions around this place without reading whole links. In fact, I'd say 100% of people around here have done. I'd be extremely surprised if anyone other than perhaps UT and maybe Bruce actually took the time to read every detail in every link before they post every time.
I'd also say that thread drift is going to happen. Just because the author of the OP doesn't happen to like the particular direction the thread has drifted to is no reason to get stuck about someone discussing a different aspect.
Should we have several threads about this one subject just to keep the pedants happy instead or just discuss the topic in one thread?
I don't think sugarpop deserves the comments she's received here, and I also think some of the points she's raised are valid regardless of whether or not they were points the author of the OP wanted raised or not.
Ms Pop directed me to the first information I read about the Cash for Clunkers program. When I posted what I'd read, from the link she directed me to, she completely changed her perspective. Not because of me, mind you, but because she forgets from one minute to the next which side she is on. :lol:
I don't think she forgets. I think she tries to see things from different perspectives.
Well I'm not entirely sure which "side" I'm on either. hey, Shaw, when did you buy your car? One of the links i read said it was being backdated to 1st july....
Yeah, but my car's government-issued mpg was far better than I actually got. It's all based on year of car, and a few other statistics, not condition of car. (The Green Machine has been a trooper, running badly but getting me to work every day!) Otherwise, I would have waited. They look at combined mileage of highway and city mileage, based on agreed upon history, and I just missed the mark.
Although, I admit I haven't read the law as set in stone, but I'm guessing that part hasn't changed.
Oh, and I bought my car end of June. lol.
Why does that make it bad? it's only very recently that manufacturers here have really been attempting to reduce the MPG, so a new car is likely to be more fuel efficient than a used one.
I think you meant increase. ;)
Also, surely, we're only guessing at the MPG of a used car. Which is fine if you're getting rid of a probable gas-guzzler, but to be certain you're replacing it with something significantly more efficient surely it needs to be new which a known mpg? I suspect if the scheme were opened up to used cars, there would be much shennanigans afoot.
They use the EPA estimated mileage that's been published for every make/model sold in the US for the last 35 years.
Seems to me, the family driving a 1980 land-yacht getting 12/14 mpg because they can't afford to trade up, and could with the help of this program buy a 2 or 3 year old car that gets 24/26 mpg, would be a good thing.
I suppose they are trying to reduce the manufacturers inventories and get the factories/employment moving, with the new car restriction. But I think they are missing an opportunity to get some of the real clunkers off the road.
Seems to me, the family driving a 1980 land-yacht getting 12/14 mpg because they can't afford to trade up, and could with the help of this program buy a 2 or 3 year old car that gets 24/26 mpg, would be a good thing.
What car did you have in mind here?
The damnfucking website has been crashing all day. you would not believe what you have to go thru.
you have to fill in all these fields that are pop up menus and then attach eleventy nine images of the documents you've scanned in.....and it won't goddamn save a claim until it's complete. It's crashed 3 times on me on this one application that i havent gotten in yet.
ive wasted 2 hours dicking around and gotten zero done.
its currently experiencing high traffic.
E
A
D
its currently experiencing high traffic.
But is the traffic getting good mileage?
Jim says they've suspended it, think the money is all used up. He's still trying to get tonight's deals entered, but the site keeps crashing.
See? A nightmare for those who have to deal with it. Why can't government consult small and successful businesses about how to think about all that stuff ahead of time, or don't expect success?
Jim says they've suspended it, think the money is all used up. He's still trying to get tonight's deals entered, but the site keeps crashing.
No, the money isn't used up. Because the traffic is so heavy the site keeps crashing, they suspended it until they can figure out how to do it.
What car did you have in mind here?
None in particular, just an example why used cars should be included, even it they stipulate a larger gain for them to qualify.
I stayed at work until 2 am scanning files and organizing the information i need to enter 10 of the 21 claims we have.....
I tried intermittently to enter claims, but was invariable frustrated by 505 internal server errors, unexpeted errors, time outs and freezing windows. i was able to submit one claim a few minutes ago when i got home....at 3:20 am.......but now ....when i log back in ....i see this:::
[FONT=ARIAL]We are currently experiencing a high volume of activity. Please try again in thirty minutes.[/FONT]
it's 3:51 am my time.....wtf
They also said all deals that were written before 11 pm last night would be honored.
The noon news, now says the money is almost gone, whereas the 11pm news last night said no. I wonder if they really know, with the computers jammed up?
I fear this may go the way of the other money in the Stimulus Bill. For example there were a bunch of grant money just given out for police departments. Many hired new cops. To bad the money is only for 3 years. After that the money will not be available anymore without more repeat spending, i.e. more money from the government largesse. Then what do all these police departments do? How about all the road projects that take years to complete? What happens when those monies run out?
Shhh. Merc. Stop that right now! You are not allowed to ask those types of questions. You know, the one that the Dems would be asking if GWB was still in the BigSeat. But the Savior is in town, and the first commandment is "Thou shalt not question your government."
Why can't people pay for their own cars, health plans, etc?
Spend, spend, spend... where does it end?
Schumer: $2 Billion More Not Enough For 'Clunkers'
New York Senator Wants $4 Billion For Wildly Popular Program, Says Senate Really Dropped The Ball Initially
http://wcbstv.com/national/cash.for.clunkers.2.1109985.htmlNone in particular, just an example why used cars should be included, even it they stipulate a larger gain for them to qualify.
So you quote an mpg, but can't quote the car? Shame. 'Cause I'd love to buy a second-hand with that mpg, but can't fins a dealer who will go anywhere near that sort of figure.
Wait a fucking minute, I didn't quote mileage, I gave an example of why the program would be just as effective for used cars as for new cars if the object is to improve mileage.
You can't find cars with that mileage?
For 2009;
Accord 22-31
Cobalt 25-35
Malibu 22-33
Focus 24-35
Altima 23-32
Camry 21-31
Accent 27-33
to name just a sampling.
And the same cars for 2006;
Accord 23-31
Cobalt 22-31
Malibu 21-29
Focus 23-31
Altima 21-29
Camry 21-31
Accent 27-32
I don't see a lot of difference there.
Dealers down here are matching the Cash for Clunks programs with $4500. Ok so you take the sticker prices (Which is BS pricing to start with) and they drop the price $4500 and add another $4500 off of that, say on a brand new Ford Focus that is a good bit of change, most anyone should be able to get a loan on that. Well unless your credit is crap and you can't manage your money. Sounds like a pretty good deal.
City (MPG)24 (2009)
Hwy (MPG)33 (2009)
Hwy (MPG)35 (2009)
I got caught behind an older Chevy Suburban at the gas station yesterday. $93 fillup for one occupant. If people can afford that, they can easily buy their own new car with decent mileage. I can't get past the idea that Congress is pissing away our money on temporary stuff for selected individuals who will continue to make stupid decisions. This program is flat out stealing.
Dealers down here are matching the Cash for Clunks programs with $4500. Ok so you take the sticker prices (Which is BS pricing to start with) and they drop the price $4500 and add another $4500 off of that, say on a brand new Ford Focus that is a good bit of change, most anyone should be able to get a loan on that. Well unless your credit is crap and you can't manage your money. Sounds like a pretty good deal.
City (MPG)24 (2009)
Hwy (MPG)33 (2009)
Hwy (MPG)35 (2009)
I doubt very much that they'll give you a $4500 dealer discount on a focus. very much.
maybe including rebates....they might have a $1000 mark up in a loaded focus.....no dealer will lose $3500 on a car if it's not being reimbursed by the manufacturer.
Especially in these deals, where they're not going to make anything on the trade in. Somehow the, "lose money on every sale, make it up on volume", doesn't work in the real world.
A lot of (most?) people don't realize the manufacturers have been steadily sliding down the percentage of MSRP that the dealer keeps, for a number of years.
Back in the Detroit hay days, the dealer could get 20%, (more on land yachts), but those days of double digit percentages are long gone.
OK, I'll give you the accent, thanks for the example. For the rest, though, especially the 2006, the lower end of their range is below the 24-26 MPG you suggested (and I misread 26-28, sorry), and given that a used car is an unknown, wouldn't you think such programs would assume the worst case scenario?
I don't disagree that it might have been a better program if it was also extended to used cars, I can just see some reasons why they might have been excluded. I'm also very leery of used cars and their claims to mpg.
Wait a fucking minute, I didn't quote mileage, I gave an example of why the program would be just as effective for used cars as for new cars if the object is to improve mileage.
You can't find cars with that mileage?
For 2009;
Accord 22-31
Cobalt 25-35
Malibu 22-33
Focus 24-35
Altima 23-32
Camry 21-31
Accent 27-33
to name just a sampling.
And the same cars for 2006;
Accord 23-31
Cobalt 22-31
Malibu 21-29
Focus 23-31
Altima 21-29
Camry 21-31
Accent 27-32
I don't see a lot of difference there.
The EPA numbers are estimated mileage for city and highway mileage. When I gave an example of trading, "a 1980 land-yacht getting 12/14 mpg" for "a 2 or 3 year old car that gets 24/26 mpg", it would have to be averages as the numbers are far to close together to be the city and highway numbers... except my Ford pickup that got 10mpg at 25mph empty and 10mpg at 60mph with a ton on. :rolleyes:
You know what my problem with this program is?
it royally fucks every college kid out there looking for a cheap car. Now the government is paying these dealers to destroy the cars I'M looking to buy!
Don't fret, there are many on the used lots already that were sold before this program came about. And if this program persuades more people to buy new, then the used car market will have more cars per buyer which might bring prices down ;)
It's heartbreaking to see this perfectly fine Volvo S80 destroyed in the name of... something. All that work and engineering simply being destroyed. Don't watch if you are a car fan, or have ANY better use of your time. Just watch the first 10 seconds to see what level of car is being destroyed here, not exactly a "clunker". It takes them a full 4 minutes to actually destroy the engine, running some sort of sand mixture instead of oil, what a testimony to Volvo...
It is not actually productive to an economy to simply *destroy* such things.
[youtube]waj2KrKYTZo[/youtube]
I wondered about this as well. A perfectly running 4 banger VW bug probably pollutes less than most cars on the road.
holy mother of fuck.
30 deals written on a monday. I was jammed from 10 am untill 12 am doing one after another.
Obama says he'll guarantee the program will cover all deals written thru midnight tuesday....... I'm afraid of tomorrow.
It's this insane activity.....managers paging for salesmen that are already all with people.....deals backing up in the rack....people waiting 3 hours to see me.....and then being all shitty and too impatient to listen to anything i have to say.....
i should call in sick.
Ok, has anyone actually gone on line and had to register and did you get this as a term of service agreement for your trade in? If so, WTF? I got this in an email and have not been able to confirm it yet. I would like to hear from any first hand buyers or someone in the know.
I was also forwarded an interesting video feed from Tony Pacheco, Kansas City Headlines Examiner. In it, staunch conservative Glenn Beck noted that when you log into the http://www.cars.gov/ website, it makes you agree to the following disclaimer:
“Any or all uses of this system, any or all uses of this system and all files on this system may be intercepted, monitored, recorded, copied, audited, inspected, and disclosed to authorized CARS, DOT, and law enforcement personnel as well as all authorized officials of other agencies, both domestic and foreign. By using this system, the user consents to such interception, monitoring, recording, copying, auditing, inspecting and disclosure at the discretion of CARS or the DOT personnel.”
If true, that is a bit frightening for the average Joe who never reads the fine print when cash is involved.
Anyone?
http://www.examiner.com/x-10974-Kansas-City-Automotive-Examiner~y2009m8d4-Cash-for-Clunkers-The-good-the-bad-and-the-uglyI doubt very much that they'll give you a $4500 dealer discount on a focus. very much.
maybe including rebates....they might have a $1000 mark up in a loaded focus.....no dealer will lose $3500 on a car if it's not being reimbursed by the manufacturer.
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
http://autos.yahoo.com/articles/autos_content_landing_pages/1036/top-cash-for-clunkers-trade-ins-and-new-cars/Can anyone think of a reason they will not release the data so Congress can see whether or not it is really worth the expense BEFORE the vote for more money? Can anyone defend that?
August 06, 2009
Obama administration withholds data on clunkers
The Obama administration is refusing to quickly release government records on its "cash-for-clunkers" rebate program that would substantiate — or undercut — White House claims of the program's success, even as the president presses the Senate for a quick vote for $2 billion to boost car sales.
The Transportation Department said it will provide the data as soon as possible but did not specify a time frame or promise release of the data before the Senate votes whether to spend $2 billion more on the program.
Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood said Sunday the government would release electronic records about the program, and President Barack Obama has pledged greater transparency for his administration. But the Transportation Department, which has collected details on about 157,000 rebate requests, won't release sales data that dealers provided showing how much U.S. car manufacturers are benefiting from the $1 billion initially pumped into the program.
LaHood, the program's chief salesman, has pitched the rebates as good for America, good for car buyers, good for the environment, good for the economy. But it's difficult to determine whether the administration is overselling the claim without seeing what's being sold, what's being traded in and where the cars are being sold.
LaHood, for example, promotes the fact that the Ford Focus so far is at the top of the list of new cars purchased under the program. But the limited information released so far shows most buyers are not picking Ford, Chrysler or General Motors vehicles, and six of the top 10 vehicles purchased are Honda, Toyota and Hyundai.
LaHood has called the popular rebates to car buyers "the lifeline that will bring back the automobile industry in America." He and other advocates are citing program data to promote passage of another $2 billion for the incentives -- claiming dealers sold cars that are 61 percent more fuel efficient than trade-ins.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/news/ap/politics/2009/Aug/06/obama_administration_withholds_data_on_clunkers.htmlToyoda*-san say "Domo arigato gozaimasu**, Amerika-san!!"
* head of Toyota Motor Corp
** thank you very much
Do itashimashite, Toyoda-san.
as far as the concept of a 'stimulus' package goes....
i can say this:
I was at work until 2:20 am on thursday night. I did 15 deliveries. only 4 of them were cash for clunker deals. clearly.....business breeds business. We have done 52 cash for clunker deals since july 24th. it's the 7th, and we've sold 80+ cars. at this pace....we'll sell 450 cars this month. our record is 307.
my boss offered me $750 to come in on Sunday to bill deals and file clunker claims.
consider me stimulated.
And when the thing is over, your boss will pay you to stay home, because all the people who wanted cars will have gotten them and the resulting lull in September will be record-breaking too.
Or like most programs being inacted under the stimulus bill, when the money is gone so will too be the "stimulus" and resultant "millions of jobs created".
as far as the concept of a 'stimulus' package goes....
i can say this:
I was at work until 2:20 am on thursday night. I did 15 deliveries. only 4 of them were cash for clunker deals. clearly.....business breeds business. We have done 52 cash for clunker deals since july 24th. it's the 7th, and we've sold 80+ cars. at this pace....we'll sell 450 cars this month. our record is 307.
my boss offered me $750 to come in on Sunday to bill deals and file clunker claims.
consider me stimulated.
That is amazing. I've found that the few Astras that were left have been snatched up as of late, as I wait for my settlement and consider what I'm going to get: I may not be able to find the same car. And I reallllllly liked that car.
Thanks for the information showing success in the program. UT, I think there might be a lull, but hopefully the business will then be in a position to ride out that lull...and as the economy slowly recovers it will be back to business as usual. Eventually.
The idea, of course, is that after the car-buying rush eases off, LJ will have a huge bucket of money from all that overtime, and he can go and spend that on beer and pizza, thus stimulating the beer and pizza sectors. Then the newly rich pizza boy can buy a new car from LJ and keep it all going.
Well, that's the idea. The fact that so many of those new cars are Japanese casts a few doubts on it all. Maybe Mr Takagawa will take a holiday in Hawaii or something.
Many Hondas are made right here in Ohio.
eta: The Honda plants, not far from me, did cut back...their cutbacks involved no lay-offs. Everyone still worked (and they make a nice wage) but at a few lesser hours. These people work hard. I hope it stimulates their economy as well: all that money will go back into the economy as their buying power goes back to what they were used to.
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
http://autos.yahoo.com/articles/autos_content_landing_pages/1036/top-cash-for-clunkers-trade-ins-and-new-cars/
I like the trend here as they may actually be getting some real crap off the roads. I still wonder if they are creating a hurdle for people who are driving super crap cars by crushing vehicles somewhat better than they're driving and pushing up prices in the used car market. It is too bad GM doesn't have anything beyond Cobalt, but Ford seems well positioned.
This is slightly outdated, but still relavent I'm sure:
GM: Sold 18.7 percent of the cars purchased under the plan.
Toyota: Had the second-most sales, with 17.9 percent.
Ford: Third with 16 percent.
Detroit Three: Have had 45 percent of the sales.
Most popular trade-ins: The Ford Explorer was the most popular, followed by the Ford F-150 and Chrysler Jeep Grand Cherokee. All of the top 10 trade-in models are made by the Detroit Three.
Fuel economy: Purchased vehicles average 25.3 miles per gallon, a 60 percent improvement over the 15.8 mpg average of trade-ins.
http://www.star-telegram.com/business/story/1522921.html
Thats not the only article that reports those, or similar figures either.
I wish they had the program when we bought 3 new cars between Dec 08 and Jan 09. I would have been happy to get in on this governemnt hand out.
So GM must be moving a spread of nominally better cars that just qualify?
Fuel economy: Purchased vehicles average 25.3 miles per gallon, a 60 percent improvement over the 15.8 mpg average of trade-ins.
If true this would be nice.
I wish they had the program when we bought 3 new cars between Dec 08 and Jan 09. I would have been happy to get in on this governemnt hand out.
I bet you got decent deals on those... I guess you made the last market driven decision in the PDR of America.
We got some pretty good deals, '07 Honda, '08 Toyota, '09 Mini.
Ha ha! Maybe they'll get a nice Lamar Alexander.
And when the thing is over, your boss will pay you to stay home, because all the people who wanted cars will have gotten them and the resulting lull in September will be record-breaking too.
why ya gotta be like that?
Trying to set your expectations... happiness is low expectations
Haggis! I love the look on the elephant's face.
I both love and hate political cartoons; they say so much, so powerfully, in such a short time, they communicate so effectively; but because they don't give a reasoned argument, they are almost invulnerable to counter-argument, and because they're funny (well the good ones are) anyone who does nit-pick just looks like a killjoy.
Anyone see this as a way to give the big 3 more money without calling it a bailout? just sayin...
Anyone see this as a way to give the big 3 more money without calling it a bailout? just sayin...
Correct me if I'm wrong but the program is open to all manufacturers, so it would not make US manufacturers any more desirable than they have been. So considering how US manufacturers have begged/lobbied/bribed Congress in the past not to raise CAFE fuel standards, on average the most fuel efficient cars are not from the big 3.
so....the claim process can suck it.
it took me 5 hours to enter 12 claims today. completely mind numbing.
We've done 65 Clunker deals to date, I still have 12 to enter.....and I'm solo all week because my shitbag partner is on vacation. prick.
gonna be a loooooong week.
Yea, but you get the commission and he doesn't, right?
no...we get paid the same on all of the deals each month.
It's a sonofabitch when one guy goes on vacation. this is just really bad timing. My only hope is that there is a little bit of a mid month lull. Now that there is a fresh 2B in the coffers, I''m hoping the frenzied atmosphere will relent a bit.
jim, I have a question:
I was thinking maybe I could get in on this once I get my settlement and purchase a new vehicle, well it's worth a shot anyway.
The MPG ratings for my piece o' crap car is higher than 18 when you figure the EPA city/highway average. I find this crazy. How are people turning in WAY better cars than my POC and getting the deal? Am I missing something?
What boggles my mind about this "Cash for Clunkers" thing is the debt people are going in. Sure, get a non-gas guzzler. That's always a good idea. But the debt? Isn't that part of the original problem from the beginning? Debt. Now the gummint is telling people to get into more debt? Just doesn't click in my feeble old mind.
I have two vehicles, a 98 Crown Vic and a 99 Dakota. Both just over 100k in miles but both run super. Main thing - they have been free and clear for years. Granted, this "program" isn't for everyone but, who would want to trade in a car that's paid for for one they're going to be paying for over the next 4, 5 or 6 years.
Interesting note about this special. I couldn't help but to notice in the paper a couple of weeks ago. Our local Kia dealership was advertising this "Cash for Clunkers" thing and featured the list price for a Kia Rio at $21k :eek: Then with the federal rebate and their rebates it would knock the price down to $12k for a new Kia Rio.
Personally, I think this entire stimulus thing has been a pile of crap from the beginning. Never, ever should a single dime ever have been given out. Capitalism should have just taken its course (if a business fails, then it fails).
The problem, Madman, is that when those businesses fail... lots of real, actual people lose out with it. Not just the execs - they've got plenty to fall back on - but all the workers all the way down the line who are suddenly out of a job, losing their home, out on the street, in dire need of our help as moral people, not to mention a social and fiscal drain on society. If we can solve the problem of absurd executive compensation, the ideal solution within our current system is to help the businesses survive. Society stays productive, people stay working and earning money, and the teetering balancing act that is the capitalist economy stays upright a little longer.
Krugman makes a good if inelegant point in today's NYT:
So it seems that we aren’t going to have a second Great Depression after all. What saved us? The answer, basically, is Big Government.
The problem, Madman, is that when those businesses fail... lots of real, actual people lose out with it. Not just the execs - they've got plenty to fall back on - but all the workers all the way down the line who are suddenly out of a job, losing their home, out on the street, in dire need of our help as moral people, not to mention a social and fiscal drain on society. If we can solve the problem of absurd executive compensation, the ideal solution within our current system is to help the businesses survive. Society stays productive, people stay working and earning money, and the teetering balancing act that is the capitalist economy stays upright a little longer.
Krugman makes a good if inelegant point in today's NYT:
Unfortunately you're right. It's the "little guy" that ultimately loses out. The heavily paid execs can generally maintain the lifestyle they already have.
No one is really concerned when small business fails. They're not missed much. But, when the mega-corp's crash and burn, everyone knows about it.
I can't help but to thing when Carter bailed out Chrysler with a $1 billion bailout package just before the end of his term. Then when Reagan became President some airline was going belly up. Reagan's response: "The U.S. Government is not in the business of bailing out failed businesses." As a result, that airline was bought out by another company and it survived.
Well, if this "Cash for Clunker" thing works... great! I'm keeping my clunkers.
Anyone see this as a way to give the big 3 more money without calling it a bailout? just sayin...
While I don't disagree with you on this, I would think that if that's truly what it was (a schemed bail out) then the financial reward would be limited to only those folks who bought a car from one of the 'big three'. (More money for domestics, lesser reward for imports).
yeh - I know Dag. I was, like I said, just sayin.
Well, it's weird - when we were home this weekend watching TV, the only commercials we saw that were even mentioning the Cash for Clunkers program was Toyota - none of the domestics were even mentioning it.
Considering they NEED the money - I'm surprised by that!
jim, I have a question:
I was thinking maybe I could get in on this once I get my settlement and purchase a new vehicle, well it's worth a shot anyway.
The MPG ratings for my piece o' crap car is higher than 18 when you figure the EPA city/highway average. I find this crazy. How are people turning in WAY better cars than my POC and getting the deal? Am I missing something?
it's al about the mpgees. i did 5 more clunkers today, bringing the total to 69. along with 8 other deals.
jesus. i was there from 6 am till midnight and fucking busy the whole time.
I'm seeing lots of Explorers, Grand Cherokees, Durangos, Windstars, and Grand Voyager/Caravan/T&C s. I would have expected more F150s.
Ok, has anyone actually gone on line and had to register and did you get this as a term of service agreement for your trade in? If so, WTF? I got this in an email and have not been able to confirm it yet. I would like to hear from any first hand buyers or someone in the know.
I was also forwarded an interesting video feed from Tony Pacheco, Kansas City Headlines Examiner. In it, staunch conservative Glenn Beck noted that when you log into the http://www.cars.gov/ website, it makes you agree to the following disclaimer:
“Any or all uses of this system, any or all uses of this system and all files on this system may be intercepted, monitored, recorded, copied, audited, inspected, and disclosed to authorized CARS, DOT, and law enforcement personnel as well as all authorized officials of other agencies, both domestic and foreign. By using this system, the user consents to such interception, monitoring, recording, copying, auditing, inspecting and disclosure at the discretion of CARS or the DOT personnel.”
If true, that is a bit frightening for the average Joe who never reads the fine print when cash is involved.
Anyone?
http://www.examiner.com/x-10974-Kansas-City-Automotive-Examiner~y2009m8d4-Cash-for-Clunkers-The-good-the-bad-and-the-ugly
That quote only applies to DEALERS using the DEALER version of the website, making them de facto government contractors using government websites for government money.
On any State Department computer, using the State Department WebPASS program for inter-office procurement or motor pool requests, you get this text:
Consent to Monitoring Warning:
This Department of State computer system should be used for official U.S. Government work only. Use by unauthorized persons, or for personal business, is prohibited and may constitute a violation of 18. U.S.C. 1030 and other Federal laws. You have NO REASONABLE EXPECTATION OF PRIVACY while using this computer. All data contained herein may be monitored, intercepted, recorded, read, copied, or captured in any manner by authorized personnel. System personnel or supervisors may give law enforcement officials any potential evidence of crime, fraud, or employee misconduct found on DoS computer systems. Furthermore, law enforcement officials may be authorized to access and collect evidence from this system. USE OF THIS SYSTEM BY ANY USER, AUTHORIZED OR UNAUTHORIZED, CONSTITUTES EXPRESS CONSENT TO THIS MONITORING. IF YOU DO NOT CONSENT, THEN DO NOT LOG ON.
Its no big deal. Big Brother is not using car sales to spy on you. They ARE using car dealers who are working with the government to sell you cars and stimulate the economy, and AS PER REGULATIONS, do have the ability (not necessarily the wish) to check their computers that are accessing the DoT servers. It's a security thing.
That's exactly what they want you to think. :tinfoil:
That is why I asked Jim, because he is on the inside. I want to hear it from a credible source.
First time I've heard a car dealer referred to as a credible source... :right:
J/k Jim, *most* of you guys are pretty straight. I've just had bad experiences while trawling through the bottom end of the market.
Some salesmen are scumbags, but LJ is a finance manager and they're above all that. They get an once of your flesh, without resorting to nasty stuff. :haha:
btw, heres a reminder from the Feds.
Some salesmen are scumbags, but LJ is a finance manager and they're above all that. They get an once of your flesh, without resorting to nasty stuff.
funny you should say that. Oft times, in order to break the ice...ease the tension....etc, I say, 'OK, Folks.....this is where we take the Pint of Blood!' it always gets a laugh....and people recognize that I know they are feeling nervous..... I have a couple other things I say to people to shake them out of their shock/whatever. when I put the Power of Attorney in front of them, I say...." this is a Power of Attorney. It makes our Attorney more Powerful." If they laugh, I know they are smart enough to understand the words coming out of my mouth. If they just sign it with that stupid look on their face, I know they are in shock over having just bought a car. If they stop and look up at me with a shitty look on their face, I know the won't be buying a goddamned thing, and that they wet the bed into their teens.
we sold 35 cars on saturday.
So, ya feelin stimulated?
Groundskeeper Willie! I want you to remove all the coloured chalk from the classrooms.
It looks like some dealerships are trying to cover their asses. From
here.
I waited patiently for about a half hour when I submitted my CARS documents to the business office, and waited another 45 minutes until it was my turn in front of the business manager to finalize paperwork. Everything was going smoothly and I was asked to sign some forms. Instead of just signing away, I recalled a few tricks I had heard dealers were pulling and started examining the documents carefully. He suggested that I could "just sign this page" and he'd fill in the rest later. I relayed that I was uncomfortable with that, considering he could write in whatever he wanted to and it had my signature on it, so he agreed to have his assistant fill it out before I signed it. Most of the other pages were fine, until I reached a carefully worded statement regarding specifically the CARS program. If I signed this page, the language was as such that if for whatever reason the government didn't provide the dealer with the proper refund, I would be held accountable for the $4,500.
This was a deal breaker and things quickly became heated. While my car was old and needed some work, it was drivable and I was perfectly willing to leave without the Sentra. He informed me that he had to protect his dealership, in case the money from the hundred or so cars he already sold didn't come in. I thought to myself, while that is fair, why are you selling cars under this program if you're uncertain about the refund? Thankfully, the www.cars.gov website was at my fingertips and I was able to quote, verbatim, the language indicating that they could not make me sign this form. I'm not sure if he didn't believe me, but he still refused adamantly. I informed him I would leave with my money and I was expecting my deposit back as well... then I mentioned I would tell people about my experience at his dealership and what he was expecting people to sign.
Here is the exact answer from the CARS site.
A dealer has included in the purchase agreement a requirement that I return the new car or pay the dealer the amount of the CARS program credit if the CARS program credit application is rejected. Do I have to sign this in order to participate in the CARS Program?
NO. You are not required to sign an agreement like this to participate in the CARS Program. However, you may agree to such a term, but your choice to agree is between you and the dealer.
Would anyone buy a car if they thought they might get stuck paying an extra $4500? I think not.
If you buy a car from us, and it's a cash for clunkers deal, you will sign a letter like that. I'll tell you what it is that you're signing. Ours is a bit different in that it gives u s a lien on the car. You don't have to pay the $4500, but if you want to keep the car you do. We won't do anything to the trade until we're paid for the rebate. while you don't have to sign this letter....we don't HAVE to sell you a car.
not fair that the dealer get stuck either, ne?
No one should get stuck, you're both right. But I find it disconcerting that a dealership would dump it all on the buyer and in this case what appears to be in a rather underhanded way. Why doesn't the paperwork say "We'll split it with you" instead of You Mr./Ms. Buyer are required to pay an extra $4500...?
But the buyer gets the car itself. Why should the dealer pay $4500 when they get nothing in return? The buyer gets a car in return.
Nay, nay, the dealer gets the pleasure of dealing with lovely people that hate them, don't trust them, and suspect they are all closet pedophiles. :lol2:
Haven't read the entire thread, but has anyone considered what this is going to do to the used car market? Because they're crushing all the cars they're taking in, there will be fewer used cars on the market, and those without the credit or resources to buy a new car are out of luck again. Another big government program that screws the poor.
Why should the dealer pay $4500 when they get nothing in return?
So the dealer is just there to deliver a car free from profit for the manufacturer? Huh?
They got the business - they made a profit, one could assume. How much depends on a number of factors.
Who would buy something for say $30,000? Then find out the cost was actually $4500 or 15% more? That makes no sense either. Neither should be on the hook for the whole amount.
Haven't read the entire thread, but has anyone considered .................
if you had read the entire thread, you'd know whether or not this had been considered *sigh*
As long as the customer has the option to return the car instead of forking over the extra $4500 (and getting their tradein clunker back before it's crushed,) I don't see the problem.
You can't return a new car - it wouldn't be new anymore. And new cars depreciate quickly.
If you buy a car from us, and it's a cash for clunkers deal, you will sign a letter like that. I'll tell you what it is that you're signing. Ours is a bit different in that it gives u s a lien on the car. You don't have to pay the $4500, but if you want to keep the car you do. We won't do anything to the trade until we're paid for the rebate. while you don't have to sign this letter....we don't HAVE to sell you a car.
not fair that the dealer get stuck either, ne?
So if I pay $30000 for the car and can't come up with the extra $4500, what happens? The car depreciated the moment it left the lot. Do I get my $30000 back or does the dealership try to give me $26000 back for my 'used' car?
The dealer is selling you the car, with Uncle Sam as your co-signer. If Sam doesn't come up with his share, take it up with him.
You can't return a new car - it wouldn't be new anymore. And new cars depreciate quickly.
Just ask Shawnee....
Gap insurance. Pays the difference between what you owe and what your car is worth now. Jim sells it.
I remember Jim posting a pic of a gap. well worth insuring, but not a lot to do with cars IIRC....
The dealer is selling you the car, with Uncle Sam as your co-signer. If Sam doesn't come up with his share, [COLOR=Red]take it up with him[/COLOR].
Yeah, good luck with that.
if you had read the entire thread, you'd know whether or not this had been considered *sigh*
OK, I've read the entire thread, some conversation about used cars, but nothing about the inflating of used car prices once $3 billion worth of used cars are crushed. Of course, I still haven't figured out where in the constitution it says they can take money from one group of people, and give that money to another group of people because they made stupid choices.
Right.
So at least you read it now. It's so fucking rude not to, being my point.
I see your point and would agree except that there's hardly a dearth of used cars...
As regards "stupid choices" you are seriously off course here. For example, our Windstar counts as a clunker. just. This has been an awesome car for us, we've used it to it's limit, we've needed nothing less. We still are. in a few years, when the kids are too old to vacation with us or can drive their own cars, we may be able to downsize. But for now t works for us. Are you calling us stupid?
If we have 10% unemployment, we still have 90% working, but those people were afraid to spend, partially because the media kept freaking everyone out.
The point was to get the automobile business (economy) moving, with a side benefit of helping improve the mileage of the nations fleet.
Personally I think they should of set the increase in mileage to be eligible higher.
I'm stupid because my 1996 Olds with 210,000 miles on it doesn't qualify for clunkerism (let's not consider things like it stalling twice on my way into work this morning.)
I'm stupid because I didn't understand all the implications of the insurance game, and some kid on a cell phone ran a red light, two weeks and 500 miles into my ownership, and I got royally fucked.
I'm stupid because I didn't listen to the advice of about 100 different people (all with differing opinions) as to how best to handle the whole deal, from buying to settling.
So, I'm stupid. The insurance game is set up to take advantage of stupid, naive, and trusting people such as me.
I say if someone can get a new car by turning in a "clunker" then more power to them. Usually, it's us stupid people getting fucked.
I get so sick of all the really smart people on earth, who make perfect choices about oh just everything, calling everyone else stupid. :eyebrow:
I'm stupid because my 1996 Olds with 210,000 miles on it doesn't qualify for clunkerism (let's not consider things like it stalling twice on my way into work this morning.)
I'm stupid because I didn't understand all the implications of the insurance game, and some kid on a cell phone ran a red light, two weeks and 500 miles into my ownership, and I got royally fucked.
I'm stupid because I didn't listen to the advice of about 100 different people (all with differing opinions) as to how best to handle the whole deal, from buying to settling.
So, I'm stupid. The insurance game is set up to take advantage of stupid, naive, and trusting people such as me.
I say if someone can get a new car by turning in a "clunker" then more power to them. Usually, it's us stupid people getting fucked.
I get so sick of all the really smart people on earth, who make perfect choices about oh just everything, calling everyone else stupid. :eyebrow:
I'm sorry shaw. You're not stupid, you didn't make bad choices I'm sure.
:comfort:
In another thread I took responsibility for not being informed enough. Like I said though, all I heard was a hundred people beeping about what I SHOULD do...then about what I SHOULD HAVE done.
For example: the gap yap. I thought gap insurance was to bridge the gap until your personal insurance kicked in. *shrugs* seems like it would be. I didn't read otherwise, until today. That's my fault for not checking I guess.
Anyway, as far as clunker cars, like I say: there's always someone telling someone they made stupid choices. I say the system is set up for otherwise intelligent people to make mistakes.
It's not like making a choice to get drunk before work, or gab on your cell when you should be driving, or not attending the class the government is paying for...
So, anyone who can get a deal on freaking anything....go for it. Maybe you'll get some pay back for someone somewhere having taken advantage (as is our society's bread and butter in the restaurant of Greed.)
I say the system is set up for otherwise intelligent people to make mistakes.
You are correct.
Several years ago, I had some elective surgery done. I was concerned about the cost, so I read up about the coverage. Found a doctor in the network. Called the insurance company beforehand and explained what I was getting done. Read the insurance book. I was assured by everyone that it was going to be 100% covered, minus a $20 co-pay. I could hardly believe it was true, but when the rep at the insurance company told me it was true. I believed it.
Later, they refused to pay like $600 of the costs. It turns out that because the doctor did the procedure in a surgery center instead of in his own office, they wouldn't cover it the same way. I assumed that "in-office" procedures meant that it wasn't done in a hospital. What it really means is that the office it's done in is the same office that the doctor has his main practice. The office location where he does his surgery doesn't count as "in-office" because other doctors use it too.
I'm a fairly intelligent person. I read the damn book. I talked to people. And still, they got me. I made a mistake and paid for it.
I say the system is set up [COLOR="Red"]TO TAKE ADVANTAGE WHEN[/COLOR] otherwise intelligent people make mistakes.
<vultures swoop in>
For example: the gap yap. I thought gap insurance was to bridge the gap until your personal insurance kicked in. *shrugs* seems like it would be. I didn't read otherwise, until today. That's my fault for not checking I guess.
If Jim didn't sell it I wouldn;t know it existed... I mean, how often do people buy new cars? And when you're sitting there trying not to get screwed everything sounds suspicious. Gap ins., undercoating, paint protector - who the fuck knows.
So, anyone who can get a deal on freaking anything....go for it.
You'd be crazy not to.
So if I pay $30000 for the car and can't come up with the extra $4500, what happens? The car depreciated the moment it left the lot. Do I get my $30000 back or does the dealership try to give me $26000 back for my 'used' car?
We don't do any title work until your claim says 'Ready for Payment'
If the deal burps, the first thing we'll do is try to keep it together somehow. First, we look at the ACTUAL value of your clunker, and try to make a deal based on that number.
We've had 2 deals fail because the insurance had a small gap. In the first one, the car was actually worth $2600. we gave up the $600 profit we were making, and the customer agreed to pay the balance. The second deal unwound.
Unwinding a deal means giving the car back to the owner. we look over the new car, make sure there is no damage...get the manual and both sets of keys back.....and thats it. the car is still new.....can be sold as new.....much like a demonstrator.
I expect that we will be unwinding a few more deals. some of these cars may be put into demonstrator service. I imagine that there are dealers out there that will attempt to keep portions of customers' deposits as recompense for the miles/condition. we're just not that kind of store. we have a good reputation, and care about our honor.
I'm beginning to worry about the program ending abruptly again. as of tonight, we've done 108 of these deals, and have still only been paid for 7 of them. there are 16 deals 'ready for payment....about 60 'under review, and the rest are 1/2 way entered awaiting image upload and submission. (10 minutes per deal that we simply don't have because we're too busy delivering vehicles)
i'm starting to have weird dreams about this shit.
ugh. I was having weird dreams about all the work I do before we went on vacation. You need to go camping with no internet and limited cellphone, i tell you. works wonders :D
that's exactly what i have planned for the early part of september.
can you make it until then?
(don't forget you'll be OLD by then :p)
i'm a tough motherfucker.
but seriously......this shit is spitting on my soul.
last sunday, the GM offered me $750 to go in Sunday and work on closing July, and entering clunker claims. I went in from 8:30am until 7 pm and got 22 deals billed and 12 clunker claims entered.
this Saturday, the GSM offered Mike and I each $1000 to work Sunday. I had just worked 10 days (10 hellish days with an average of 4.5 hours of sleep between) in a row. I had my own birthday celebration to attend and a lawn to mow, and a family to see....so I was forced to pass. Am I wrong to be bittter that Mike got $1000 for working 7 am to 1PM....? I COULD have worked and gotten it.....but.....
I feel like i got fucked out of $250.
Actually you got fucked out of $1250, feel better now? :haha:
no, you're not wrong, but that $250 ain't worth the stress it's causig you
Money sure helps to make life nicer, but it isn't the be-all-and-end-all.
I had to delay our family vacation by one day because I needed to complete the tax return for a 501c3 org that was due while we were away, and for various reasons is became impossible to do on the scheduled day. I did feel cheated. We all did -the kids were packed and playing legos until it was time to go ..and ended up being sent to bed.... But it needed to be done and for a few minutes, i though fuck! I'm not even being paid for this.... and then i thought.... if i was, the "how much" would be something else to worry about! :lol:
Actually you got fucked out of $1250, feel better now? :haha:
YOU DICK!
NPR is reporting that GM is bringing folks back to work and turning on the overtime spigot.
If it helps any, I got $350 to work 32 hours in the sweltering heat of the folk fest.
The "stupid choice" idea is the governments, not mine. They think if you don't drive the kind of car they want you to, it's a stupid choice, as in "Police acted stupidly." The point is, why do I have to pay people to get a new car when I can't afford one? Where in the constitution does it say the govt has the right to do that?
If it helps any, I got $350 to work 32 hours in the sweltering heat of the folk fest.
When did they start paying for that? When we used to work it, it was for free meals and camping.
I was hired, not volunteered. They had to introduce a separate rent-a-cop committee of the volunteers system, because nobody would do that job unless they got paid. Nobody wants to be the Man.
So it was 8 hours straight for four days straight, sometimes in direct sunlight, wearing a badge, searching people's coolers, no breaks except for bathroom, your lunch or dinner is delivered to you. The good thing, on Saturday night I worked at the merch tent, basically making sure people weren't taking anything without paying; and from where I was stationed, I could hear the main stage. (Decemberists: awesome. Iron and Wine: awesome.)
Ah, yeah, we were volunteers, had a lot of fun while were 'working'. My friends and I worked parking detail, which ranged from laying drunk in the parking lot tanning ourselves, to trying to direct shuttle busses in the dark with road flares while dodging state police cars (who didn't take direction from us at all) who were swarming the area looking for a sniper that turned out to be a stoned kid with a paint ball gun scared off his shit.
Jim worked security, checking badges mostly, to make sure no non-volunteers snuck into the tent where they fed us.
Good times...
I've heard good things about Iron and Wine, maybe I'll get to see them at some point.
It's ironic but Iron and Wine is really just one guy. Live, it was just him and his acoustic. On recordings he brings in a band. Kinda like James Taylor, or Simon and Garfunkel, you know, they could play all those songs with just voice and guitar, but on records they'd have a whole band.
I heard a rumor that Uncle Sugar is slow to pay the dealerships. It'd be funny if Obamanomics failed to produce the promise.
Guess he could call it a clerical error.
Maybe he'll give a speech or invite all the owners of the auto dealerships he fuked over to the WH for a brewski. He could even have the clerk there to apologize.
Clerk: :blush: "Me tho thowy."
Oblama: :blunt: "It was in de best interest of all parties concerned that we meet today as citizens of this great country and settle our differences regarding this small oversight."
Dealer Reps: :noevil: Got any Coors?
Secretary LaHood Announces Wind Down to Hugely Popular CARS Program
U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood announced Thursday that after a wildly successful run, the cash for clunkers program will come to a close on Monday, August 24th at 8 p.m. EDT.
I'm posting this from work.....look at the clock. it's tomorrow.
i have 6 more deals to recap before I go home. This was an interesting program. I expect that tomorrow and Saturday will be retardedly hectic......I will be working Sunday again to get all the the claims in....and Monday.....will suck. You just know that they will have some ass that knows someone important decide he wants in at 6pm on monday....then we'll have a 'beat the clock' scenario entering his claim. and Tuesday we won't sell a car.
[B]
and Tuesday we won't sell a car.
All's well that ends well. Time to bury it.
Next week it'll be time for Jim to get the "Clunker flu" - if ya know what I mean
are you saying he's been putting his naughty bits where he shouldn't've? :eek:
Next week it'll be time for Jim to get the "Clunker flu" - if ya know what I mean
are you saying he's been putting his naughty bits where he shouldn't've? :eek:
Yes. And now he's exhausted.
Ba dum dum
I wonder how many procrastinators went through Jim's showroom though. They've seen the new cars, they have the itch, they need only get around the feeling that they gave away $4500.
Or don't have a clunker and were waiting for the frenzy to pass.
... and Tuesday we won't sell a car.
Because all the dealership employees will be sleeping for a week?
Or don't have a clunker and were waiting for the frenzy to pass.
Good point. Personal experience shows that even a POC car that you need to get rid of isn't always considered a clunker.
And FUCK A DUCK. I just realized I finally got my damn money for my car and was going to get a car this weekend. It'll be crazy, won't it?
OH JIM? Do you think the crowds will make it more likely or less likely they'll accept my cash offer? Please let me know your opinion. I want to get the best car I can with the money I can spend, and I need to know how to approach.
I think I already said this Shawnee, but see if you can get a demonstrator model. Has 1,000 miles on it, cost $4,000 less. Damn near replaces what you lost.
That's what we did with a car for our youngest, got a 2009 Toyota for quite a bit off sticker with 2500 miles on it.
Hoooooly shit, Houston.
Holy mother of fuck
40 cars today. 33 yesterday.
jesus h christ in a chicken basket
It was raining, they had nothing else to do. :haha:
Guess you're working tomorrow.
Evidently it closes today at 8pm. Maybe you'll get some sleep now, Jim.
And I've many jokes left unused.
It's a damn shame.
[FONT=ARIAL]To better meet the high demand we're experiencing, we have temporarily shut down the service so we can expand our capacity to more quickly serve your requests. Please visit the site at a later time. We apologize for any inconvenience.[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman] [/FONT]
Do you have to have everything entered onto the website today, or just have the deals done today and you can enter the the info on the website later in the week?
Japanese, Koreans gain most from cash for clunkers
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Japanese and South Korean automakers registered the biggest market share gains in the U.S. government's "cash for clunkers" program that ended this week with bankruptcy related inventory shortages hurting General Motors Co GM.UL and Chrysler.
Toyota Motor Corp (7203.T) Honda Motor Co Ltd (7267.T), Nissan Motor Co Ltd (7201.T), Hyundai Motor Co (005380.KS) capitalized on the program's goal of pushing consumers away from gas guzzling sport utilities and pickups, to more efficient cars and trucks, preliminary sales figures showed on Wednesday.
Overseas manufacturers dominate in car sales, while U.S. companies have been stronger in the light truck segment. Cars outsold trucks 2-1 under the "clunker" initiative.
Ford Motor Co (F.N) was the only domestic manufacturer to hold its own in market share compared with its performance so far this year, while GM slipped and Chrysler stumbled noticeably.
GM spokesman Greg Martin said the company, which slowed production significantly during the spring and its early summer bankruptcy, recorded brisk sales of Malibu, Cobalt and other car models in the first weeks of the program.
"We were running thin going into the summer to begin with and, as the program went on, inventory levels play(ed) a part," Martin said.
Ford was the only domestic manufacturer with top-selling models in the "clunkers" program.
I read that the progeam came in slightly under the $3B budget.
Maybe this will help the US automakers to realize that they should offer some low gas mileage vehicles.
Non-American car companies employ Americans too.
You are correct Mon - but recall at the beginning it Ford was no 1. When things ended there wasn't an American company near the top.
Toyota Motor Corp. led the industry with 19.4 percent of new sales, followed by General Motors Co. with 17.6 percent and Ford Motor Co. with 14.4 percent
Thanks Bruce. I believe your number is a % of total sold thru the program vs. a marketshare comparison.
Ford Motor Co (F.N) was the only domestic manufacturer to hold its own in market share compared with its performance so far this year, while GM slipped and Chrysler stumbled noticeably.
A million people will have a million reasons for buying what they buy. Under the CforC program, they had to follow someone(Government) else's reasons in order to qualify. Of course the main one being a sizable increase in mileage.
That's why the skewed change in market share. But even with the CforC rules, the "US Big 3" sold 39% to 41% for the "Jap Big 3".
August is now in the books where I work
I personally delivered 217 of the 368 units and generated $141K for the company.
holy shit, houston. holy mother of fuck.
August is now in the books where I work
I personally delivered 217 of the 368 units and generated $141K for the company.
And at 20% commission, you are buying dinner for the whole cellar family WOO HOO!!!!
How many did Duke sell?
39! ....By the Grace of God....
God Bless you
Maybe this will help the US automakers to realize that they should offer some low gas mileage vehicles.
I think what would work better would be to inflate the invoice values and give big rebates. It helps with the financing.
Maybe this will help the US automakers to realize that they should offer some low gas mileage vehicles.
We are in the market to replace my daughters 09 Toyota Corolla. There is not a single 09 left on any lot in a 150 miles of us, every one of them was sold in the last month in the CfC program.
I think what would work better would be to inflate the invoice values and give big rebates. It helps with the financing.
:lol:
Oh you naughty, naughty boy. Just you wait until TW gets home and finds out about all these money games.
Zen's right! "Mental midgets" and "bean-counter mentality" and all that. Boy are you gonna get it!
