Car Insurance

Wheelbase:2855mm

Lenth:4754mm

Width:1928mm

Height:1726mm

Weight:2250mm

Fuel capacity:100liters

Engine: v-8Domc

Displacement:417cc

Max o/p 305bhp@3000rpm

0-100km/h 8.10s

Top speed:218km/h

Transmission: 6A

Drive: 4WD

The United States automotive industry has been undergoing tremendous changes in recent years. Speakers at a recent Chicago Fed conference explored these changes and considered the road to the future for the auto industry.

In order to better understand the changes taking place in the production of automobiles and to gain some insight into what the future holds for the industry in the U.S., the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago held a conference on Monday, June 11, Transitions: The State of the Automotive Industry.1 More than 100 economists and analysts from business, academia, and government attended the conference and industry experts were invited to share their perspectives on this topic.

The United States automotive industry has been undergoing tremendous changes in recent years. Some of these changes include significant reductions in employment, factory closings, bankruptcies among the supplier base, downgrades on corporate bond issuances, and consolidations. One needs to merely pick up any daily newspaper to also see the market share losses by the group formerly known as the Big Three (now more appropriately called the Detroit Three-Daimler Chrysler, Ford Motor Company, and General Motors).

While the Detroit Three have been dealing with mostly bad news, foreign nameplate producers are enjoying a very different environment. Rather than closing plants, there are several automotive production facilities being planned by these “new domestics” over the coming years.

If we look back to 1980, when there was very little production by foreign nameplate firms in the U.S., the Detroit Three made up nearly 73% of all the light vehicles sold, while foreign-nameplated production in the U.S. was less than 2%, and imports representedjust over a quarter of the market . Beginning in the 1980s, an ever-increasing number of foreign-nameplated vehicles began to be produced in the U.S. at factories that were referred to as transplants. Through the early to mid-1990s, the popularity of the sport utility vehicle (SUV) supported the Detroit Three’s market share. In 1996, the Detroit Three’s market share stood at 72.5%, virtually the same as 16 years earlier. However, imports’ share had declined by 14 percentage points to just over 11%, and new domestics market share had risen to more than 16% of the market. The gains of the new domestics came at the expense of imports.

Over the next ten years, however, the Detroit Three would not be as fortunate. Challenged by the growing number of foreign SUVs, rising energy prices, and a flat overall sales market, the Detroit Three’s market share began to suffer. By 2006, their market share plunged nearly twenty percentage points to 53%. New domestics sales had risen to nearly a quarter of the market, and imports sales rose to over 22%. So unlike the previous 16-year period, the loss over the past ten years of 20 percentage points of market share by the Detroit Three is the direct result of gains by both new domestics and imports.

However, the market share of vehicles being produced in the U.S. in 2006 was still over 77%, several percentage points higher than in 1980, but by a greater number of firms than in the past. So, what has happened over the past ten years is less a concern about the loss of vehicle production in the United States, but more about the transition from the domestic industry being comprised of the Detroit Three to an industry that has more producers. Consequently, the Detroit Three are playing a less dominant role in the industry.

While it is true that the new domestics vehicles had been made with less domestic content than Detroit Three vehicles, this pattern has been changing. Over the last ten years, new domestics have been increasing the amount of domestic content, while the Detroit Three have been lowering their domestic content, as they outsource more components. For example, 70% of the 2007 Ford Mustang’s parts were made in the United States and Canada, while over 85% of the 2007 Toyota Sienna’s parts were sourced in the United States and Canada.

Expanding on the role of foreign manufacturers and markets in the auto industry, Loren Brandt, professor, University of Toronto, presented his findings on China’s auto production. Brandt emphasized the importance of the Chinese market because of its recent economic growth. For all the countries producing more than a million vehicles per year, China’s production growth outstripped all the others in the market: from 2000 to 2005, coming in at 181.3%. During the same time period, the results for other countries in that group were quite mixed: U.S., -5.9%; Germany, 4.2%; France, 5.8%; Spain, -9.2%; South Korea, 29.4%; Italy, -40.3%; and the UK, -0.4%. The growth in the automotive industry, in fact, has been so large in China that it has begun to cut back on its production of trucks, which are used for business, and to focus more on passenger vehicles for its consumer market.

Alan Mulally had them from the start. The president and CEO of Ford Motor Company, speaking to a packed house at the Center for Automotive Research’s Management Briefing Seminars, couldn’t have had a more receptive audience even if the venue was in Dearborn, not Traverse City. There he was on stage, recalling when he was working on the Boeing 777 , and how he spent a few days with Lew Veraldi, the man who was behind the original Team Taurus, when Ford truly broke the mold for what American cars could be …

Unlike other CEOs or execs that make presentations in front of suppliers, customers, employees, journalists, researchers, academics, and other interested parties, Mulally was working without PowerPoint. That’s right. No bullet points. No videos showing cars with hard-driving music. Just a man in a blue blazer and a tie, who walked away from the podium and the Teleprompters, who asked for the house lights to be brought up so that he could see the members of the audience as well as they could see him. He was working without a script. He didn’t even have a handful of index cards. He just talked about what they are doing at Ford to sustainably turn the company around. One of the points that he made in more than one way was, essentially, that it is important to deal with reality. While it might seem that that is what everyone does all the time, had people at Ford–as well as many more companies in this industry, OEMs and suppliers alike–been doing that, the company probably wouldn’t have had to go out to the financial community in search of $23.5-billion for funding its restructuring plan (which he charmingly described as “the biggest home improvement loan”). That’s because it might not have needed a restructuring plan. Those dealing with reality would have recognized that the vehicle manufacturer–ditto other OEMs and suppliers–has, in Mulally’s words, “tremendous overcapacity.” They would have recognized the profound over-reliance on trucks and SUVs.

Mulally said that every one of the planes that he’d had the opportunity to work on had one thing in common: “A point of view about the future.” He explained that it wasn’t that it was a case where the 747 would be a big multi-row plane and the 757 would be a long single-row plane, that one would carry X passengers and the other Y passengers, but that the point of view about what they would do would be things like transforming transoceanic travel or providing greater range and efficiency. They were meant to do something. And he suggested that that is what companies need to have when developing products. Which explains, in part, why Boeing is able to compete with its foreign competitors in a way that the domestic vehicle manufacturers haven’t, or at least haven’t done as well.

While Mulally spelled out in large strokes what they are doing at Ford (dealing with overcapacity and restructuring in order to get to the state where they can effectively deal with “real demand”; accelerating the development of new products and services; creating value; and working together within the organization, as well as with suppliers and dealers), what is more telling about Mulally’s approach to organizational effectiveness came when he talked in a more generic sense about what needs to be done–1. Understand business demands; 2. Develop a plan; 3. Include everyone; 4. Review continually–which sounds suspiciously like the Deming cycle of Plan-Do-Check-Act. Whether it is or not doesn’t matter as much as the fact that it is a methodology that can serve all of us well.

Mulally spoke of the need to sustain manufacturing in America, which is a somewhat refreshing thing to hear in the context of all-to-many-people talking about a “low-cost country” strategy, which is essentially not-too-cryptic code for “sending the work to China.” He talked about how when he spoke to Congress on the subject of Corporate Average Fuel Efficiency standards and pointed out that what was being proposed was not an arithmetic average increase but a harmonic average increase, the response was puzzlement: Was Mr. Mulally talking about math? He said that while they acknowledge that energy independence and security, as well as environmental stewardship are of concern, he also stated that he was afraid that some people in Washington could, through what he described as a “market-distorting policy” (a.k.a. CAFE), “destroy a phenomenal industry in the United States.”

If Mulally’s past is prologue, then perhaps he will be successful in leading the needed transformation at Ford. Given his freshness and candor, his belief and passion, I, like many in the room in Traverse City, as well as throughout the country, certainly hope that he will be.

Ford Motor Co. recalled about 155,000 pickup trucks and sport utility vehicles on Monday to repair a cruise control switch system that already had led to millions of recalls.

Ford said the latest recall involved 2003 versions of the F-150, F-250, F-350, F-450 and F-550 Super Duty truck, the Ford Excursion SUV and the Lincoln Blackwood pickup.

The No. 2 U.S. automaker previously had recalled 5.8 million vehicles in the past two years because of engine fires linked to the cruise control systems in trucks, SUVs and vans. That recall, one of the largest in history, covered vehicles from the 1994-2002 model years.

Ford officials said Monday an internal check found the switch systems in some early 2003 trucks and SUVs and the company acted to allow owners to get it repaired. The switch system could corrode over time, overheat and ignite.

“We wanted to make sure that customers could go to the dealerships and deal with that as soon as we knew it,” Ford spokesman Dan Jarvis said. He said there had been no reports of fires in the 2003 vehicles.

The F-150 pickup has been the top-selling vehicle in the U.S. for 30 years and is considered crucial to Ford’s attempts to return to profitability. The F-Series has faced soft sales in recent months because of a slowdown in housing construction; sales for the pickup were down nearly 12 percent in 2006 to nearly 800,000 vehicles.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration completed an extensive investigation last year into the cause of the fires. Through August of last year, the most recent data available, the agency had received 1,472 complaints connected to the problems, including 65 reports of fires.

The safety agency has said there have been no confirmed deaths or injuries, but lawsuits were filed in Iowa, Georgia and Arkansas over deaths allegedly tied to the fires. The automaker reached a settlement in the Iowa case in October.

Ford said last year its review found that brake fluid could leak through the cruise control’s deactivation switch into the system’s electrical components, leading to corrosion. That could produce a buildup of electrical current that could cause overheating and a fire.

To fix the problem, dealers install a fused wiring harness to the cruise control deactivation switch to prevent the risk of fire if the switch leaked. Ford officials said about 45 percent of the vehicles under the previous recalls have been repaired.

In the face of Hurricane Katrina, pastors on the Gulf Coast were confronted with the challenge of protecting their families, serving their congregations, sheltering the displaced and finding some way to continue in ministry. Here are some voices from the midst of the crisis.

BY SATURDAY, September 3, we were serving 200 meals a day out of the kitchen. People were donating all sorts of things to us, but nothing had gotten in from the outside. We had generators running, refrigeration, and a TV on which we could watch the latest worthless news coverage. We had to make an agreement to hold each other’s hands when we met a media person so we didn’t slap ‘em. There was little useful information out there. We were blessed by God in the midst of it all, and the church was surely serving the community.

Security was the huge issue. Roving gangs of looters and druggies were around. We had to guard the church at night. It was pretty hairy. We were housing about 35 people from the neighborhood in the education wing.

On Saturday some New Orleans police told us to leave. Another group of police told us it would be better to stay, because our conditions were better than those in most of the shelters.

Whether to leave became a moot point after dark when ten SUVs showed up loaded with National Guard troops and border patrol agents, who said, “We are getting you all out of here. You have an hour.” By that time the gangs were getting closer and we could not deal with the security issues. We evacuated about 100 people from the church and community. Some are in a shelter–God knows where.

The church is heavily damaged. We will need a new roof. The bell tower came apart and the bell is loose. The tower itself was moving back and forth four to five feet from the church. It held, but is not structurally sound. All that is insured, but the ministry is not.

We did get folks out, but we really need to get back in to take care of the community and start the rebuilding process. Lutheran Disaster Relief will tell you that if you get in too late, you never really are accepted.

We have staff to pay, we have no students, no school receiving tuition payments. People are scattered all over and our collections are down. We have a great chance now to teach people about what the church really is. Let’s get the focus off the brick and mortar and on to the ministry. Jesus did it with word and sacrament. We can too.

–David Goodine, pastor of St. Paul Lutheran Church, just east of the French Quarter, which sheltered community members in church facilities during the week after the storm. He and others at the church were evacuated on September 3.

OUR CHURCH IS completely destroyed, but we’re having a great opportunity to minister. Since September 1 we’ve been fielding teams that are coming in to clean up.

Probably 60 percent or more of our church family have some type of severe damage to their homes. We’re doing our best to meet their needs.

We are trying to be strategic in sending teams to the neighborhood of a church member, where they can also help out others in the neigborhood as a way to share the love of Christ.

We’re starting to see a better picture of the New Testament church emerge. Our people are having to get back to the concept that the church is the people of God, not the facility.

For worship, we will gather at a high school auditorum, and we’ll be there as long as they let us stay.

We’re focused on meeting immediate needs. We are just beginning to think about the future, planning for a ministry base without a facility. A new building is two to three years away.

This is a Sunday school-driven church. At some point we are going to have to look at how to do discipleship classes, how to do youth and children’s ministry. In all likelihood it will involve house ministry. We’ll just have to reinvent church for First Baptist.

–Brian Upshaw, senior associate pastor at First Baptist Church in Gulfport, Mississippi.

AT 4:30 A.M. on Sunday, August 28, my spouse woke me up. “Cliff, that storm has taken a northern turn. We are going to get out of here.” I knew it was the right decision, but I thought about the sermon I’d prepared, and the few who were still in town and might come to worship. What would they say if I abandoned them?

I sent a group e-mail to all the members telling them that I had decided to “evacuate”–that awful word. My spouse packed a few plastic bags of with extra clothes. No time for the pictures, the memories, the keepsakes, the diplomas. It was time to get out and get out quick!

Then I thought, “What about Ann?” She is an 80-year-old neighbor, with no relatives in town, no car, no resources. I woke her up. “It looks like it’s the big one,” I said. “Are you ready to go?”

I was surprised when she said, “Give me 15 minutes.”

So 15 minutes later, with a few clothes and bags loaded, Ann was in the car with my wife, Nieta, and we were headed north.

We’ve gotten a blessed chaos of shipments, many sent by other Methodists, folks across the country who knew churches or members in Mississippi and so sent help. The Methodist Book of Discipline speaks of connectionalism as a “blessed web of interactive relations,” and we see that now. Everyone just wants to help, no one’s falling prey to trying to control this.

We had loss of life in three churches where people sought refuge but were just swept away by the floodwater. There is tremendous griefwork to be done. But we can’t tend to it because folks have so many immediate needs for food and shelter.

During the hurricane we had churches sheltering people in their attic or second floor, churches that sent out folks in boats to rescue people. We had one person swimming in the flood who motioned to a Hispanic woman in the shape of a steeple over his head, since he couldn’t speak Spanish–that was his way of saying, “Come to my church!”

I’ve not heard anyone ask, “Where was God?” I’ve heard many say, “God was with us.” Many will and have asked that, of course. We have all levels of sadness but also a tremendous sense of God’s presence. With the psalmist “we have seen the goodness of the Lord in the land of the living.” There has been loss of life and possessions, but the preaching I’ve heard insists that no one is asking about stuff, but whether people are OK.

Someone phoned the Methodist building, saying he’d called information and said there had to be a Methodist conference building in that area code. He was a Methodist, and he was trying to find his two children. We sent someone to the convention center, they announced the children’s names on the loudspeaker, a couple brought them forward, and they were told their father was in Houston looking for them. That’s part of what we’re doing–connecting people.

We’ve had to put pressure on the Red Cross and FEMA to get benefits to the churches in our city that are sheltering people. We met with the mayor and city council, to get them to help. At first the Red Cross and FEMA were giving assistance only to people at identified shelters, like the Lake Charles Civic Center and Burton Coliseum. Food, blankets, clothing, medical aid were not being made available to those being housed in the churches. Our people were supposed to go to those shelters. But a lot of our people didn’t want to go. They wanted a more homey atmosphere. After a week the Red Cross relented and started giving out supplies.

On the Sunday after the storm I preached on “Preparing for life,” based on Mark 1:1-13. I said we prepare for life by receiving the Holy Spirit, we prepare by receiving a divine call, and we prepare by being tested. And we were being tested. I wanted people who had been displaced to not get discouraged by the state they were in, but to see it as preparing them further for life.