Soon. As in, October-soon.
It looks like the first iPhone app to bring us real-time traffic alerts, and that comes with offline maps, will be the Navigon MobileNavigator (Earlier CNET review. iTunes Store link.)
The AT&T Navigator (CNET review) also has live traffic data, but takes more time to download maps as you go, and while initially free, has a $10 monthly fee. Navigon has a steep $90 price tag, and you’ll pay $20 or $25 for the live traffic upgrade, but if you use it for more than a year, it’s already cheaper than the AT&T version.
(I’d like to take a moment to congratulate both Navigon and AT&T for sensibly choosing just one business model – monthly fee, or upfront fee – instead of both. Too many companies these days get away with a charge upfront and also making you pay monthly. I’m sure they have their reasons, but as a consumer, it just seems wrong.)
I’ve already recently cut at least 5 minutes off my daily commute by utilizing traffic data of other drivers. This is a win/win, since bad traffic throws me in a rage faster than anything else, and I’m not the most defensive driver. If I can have a tool with me that warns me of upcoming traffic problems, and helps me navigate around them, so much the better.
On the other hand, it seems I’m always driving to the same ten or twelve places. I’m not what marketers like to call a “road warrior” (isn’t this just a euphemism for salesperson?), so I don’t think I can justify the cost just yet.
Have you used the Navigon or AT&T apps? What do you think?
Navigon GPS iPhone app to get live traffic, Dong Ngo, CNET, Sep. 16, 2009
Photo credit: borderlys
It’s debatable whether the Cash for Clunkers program, formally known as the “Car Allowance Rebate System” or the apt but unoriginal acronym “CARS,” will eventually be seen as successful either in terms of the economy or the environment, but it certainly has dealerships fired up.
While the dealers appreciate the customers — without Cash for Clunkers, customers would still be waiting in the wings — they are now concerned about not receiving the $3,500 or $4,500 rebate payments for the government. And it’s no wonder.
- Only 225 of the 635 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration employees are currently processing 412,000 dealership claims for the credit.
- The funding for the program may run out sooner than Labor Day. Update: I was right, the government announced Cash for Clunkers will end on Monday, August 24.
- Up to 80% of some dealers’ applications are being rejected by the NHTSA due to incomplete paperwork.
CARS has become a massive marketing campaign, getting hundreds of thousands of customers through dealership doors. I’ve seen flatbed trucks transporting crushed clunkers on their way to clunker purgatory. The program is evidently popular, but there seems to be confusion between customers, dealerships, and the government. And as far as marketing campaigns go, it beats Ford’s “Why Ford? Why Now? Why Not?” campaign that seems to be an admission that no one can think of a reason to buy a Ford vehicle.
If you expect to use the Cash for Clunkers credit to your advantage, know your rights. Dealers are not allowed to ask customers to place a down payment as security against the credit. They are also not allowed to require customers to settle with the dealer if the government fails to approve the CARS application. You can find all the rules at the CARS FAQ, but here are some of the relevant items.
Question: A dealer has demanded that I sign an agreement that requires me to pay the dealer the amount of the CARS program credit if the dealer’s CARS program credit application is rejected. Am I required to agree to this?
Answer: NO. To participate in the CARS program, you do not have to sign an agreement to pay back the dealer the CARS credit amount if the deal is rejected.
Question: The dealer says that I should take my trade-in car home after I sign the purchase agreement for a new car under the CARS program, and that I can pick up my new car after the dealer is paid by the government. Can I do this?
Answer: NO. The dealer must take title to and possession of your trade-in vehicle in order to submit a credit for reimbursement under the CARS program. You may not keep possession of your old car.
Question: A dealer has demanded that I sign an agreement that requires me to pay the dealer if the credit application is rejected because I submit incorrect information regarding my name, residence address, driver’s license number, or the title to my trade-in car. Am I required to agree to this?
Answer: NO. However, be aware that to participate in the CARS program you must certify under penalty of law that all information you provide is true. If your CARS program credit is denied because of a false statement made by you, the dealer may take action to recover the money or vehicle regardless of whether you sign such an agreement.
Question: A dealer has demanded that I leave a signed check or credit card authorization in the amount of the CARS program credit that he will return to me if the credit application is approved, but keep if the credit application is rejected. Is the dealer allowed to do this?
Answer: NO. The dealer must reduce the price of the new vehicle by the credit amount. If a dealer has a check or credit card authorization given by you at the time of the sale, the dealer has not actually reduced the price as required by the CARS program. Take your trade-in to another dealer if a dealer makes this demand.
Question: 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?
Answer: 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.
If you believe a dealer is acting outside accordance with the law, you can report them to the NHTSA by calling 1-866-CAR-7891.
Clunker traffic jam angers dealers, Rick Newman, US News & World Report, August 19, 2009.
The “Cash for Clunkers” program that we told you about on June 19 has received a shot in the arm in almost-last-minute actions by the House and Senate. They approved an additional $2 billion to continue the unexpectedly popular rebate program through Labor Day.
Opponents of the program feel like:
Richard Shelby, the top Republican on the Senate Banking Committee, said the program “has squeezed months of normal activity” into a short period of time.
But NPR’s Planet Money pointed us to at least one couple who wouldn’t have bought a new car if it weren’t for the program.
And though rebates are reportedly difficult to process, dealers and automakers love the program:
“There is no question that ‘cash for clunkers’ has succeeded,” said Dave McCurdy, chief executive of the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, the chief trade group for General Motors Co, Chrysler LLC, Ford Motor Co, Toyota Motor Corp and other big carmakers.
Have you participated? If so, were you going to buy a new car, anyway?
“Cash for clunkers” gets a $2 billion boost, John Crawley, Reuters, August 7, 2009
Editor’s Note: This program is back on again and should be available through Labor Day, 2009
All good things must come to an end, and in some cases, prematurely. The “Cash for Clunkers” Program, or more formally, the Car Allowance Rebate System, has allocated almost all of its budget to rebates after only four days. The law called for the program to last until November 1 or until the funds are depleted, which ever condition occurs sooner, but I do not think there were many people who expected the funds to run out this quickly.
Consider yourself lucky if you were able to qualify for the program before it was suspended.
Car dealerships apparently saw active business this past weekend, and if all the funds were used up then the program was somewhat successful. While on the surface, Cash for Clunkers appeared to be a program designed to help consumers or to help the environment, but the real goal was to help dealers sell cars. It resulted in some short-term success despite setbacks due to the EPA’s recalculation of mpg, but we will have to wait for the car companies to report their finances to judge the success.
It’s also a possibility that Cash for Clunkers will come back. If the Congress decides the program is worth spending more money, we could see another Cash for Clunkers. And if we do, it might even improved to apply to more cars.
Update: While the Transportation Department called dealerships to tell them to stop accepting applications for Cash for Clunkers, the White House informed the public overnight that the program would continue. The House and Senate are now racing to re-authorize the program for another $2 billion.
The Cash for Clunkers Program went into effect recently, but so did changes to the official EPA-estimated mpg ratings of several cars. For example, the 1987 Mercury Grand Marquis, according to CNN Money, was rated a combined 18 mpg last week, but as the program began this week, the rating for this year, make and model jumped to 19 mpg on Monday.
While a change of 1 mpg seems relatively insignificant, the Grand Marquis rated at 19 mpg no longer qualifies as a trade-in worth up to $4,500 under the Cash for Clunkers Program. Since the new legislation was made retroactive to July 1, car dealers have been including the rebate in their deal calculations before the rebates were available. Furthermore, dealers offered the anticipated credit as an immediate benefit to the customer with the expectation of being able to file for the credit. But this change by the EPA resulted in some cars no longer qualifying for the credit already given to the customers and as a result, some dealers have been asking customers for the money back or threatening to take back the new car.
According to the EPA, 78 models became ineligible for the credit after the reassessment of mpg calculations while 86 other models have become eligible, so there may be credits available for some who may not be aware. The recalculations occurred for model years 1985-2007 to use the same calculation that began in 2008. This puts all cars released since 1985 on the same scale, and this was a change required by the new legislation.
My 2004 Honda Civic changed from an official EPA combined estimate of 34 mpg in the old calculation method to 30 mpg in the new calculation method. You can see how your car’s estimates changed at the car finder at FuelEconomy.gov.
After General Motors’ bankruptcy, there is no question that the automobile industry will change significantly. With less competition and higher costs of production, prices will increase. It will be more difficult and more expensive to find parts and service for some vehicles. The selection of vehicles will be more limited.
Perhaps more brands will opt to adopt the sales philosophy held by Saturn and Scion: the price advertised is the price you pay. At first, the concept seemed like a scam. You always negotiate car prices, but with Saturn’s entrance to the market, the manufacturers or dealers said, “Don’t negotiate with us anymore; it’s our price or no sale.”
This method, where cars were sold more like a commodity than a luxury, proved to be quite popular, especially with younger individuals who do not have haggling experience. Taken to the step beyond prix fixe voiture, cars could be sold “off the shelf” in retail stores rather than dealerships. According to US News & World Report, at least one retail outlet in Mexico sells cars in addition to other typical retail products, and the United States may follow.
Just about the only place to buy a car these days is a traditional dealership, thanks largely to powerful franchise laws in most states that keep other competitors at bay. But as automakers slash their retail networks, dealers are losing their clout. For new offerings such as minicars, and perhaps cheap Chinese imports, a big showroom with a dedicated sales staff might not even make sense. That could open the way for retailers like Costco or Wal-Mart to start selling cars.
This may be the future of automobile sales: View the floor models in an open area of the massive store, talk to the salesperson, and as if the product were a high-definition television, let the salesperson try to talk you into the extended warranty and other options. Wait for him to bring the car from the stock garage in the back to the cashier, where you pay the price on the sticker. Perhaps you’ll put your purchase on your credit card (store credit will be offered) and earn loyalty points.
I expect most popular brands, like Honda and Toyota, might not accept this model. It may be suitable for lower tier brands and low-cost models not yet popular in the United States. The New General Motors may see this sales avenue as the path back to profitability.
Would you prefer to buy cars from retail stores like Wal-Mart or Costco if this new sales philosophy reaches the United States?
How buying a car is going to change, U.S. News & World Report, June 4, 2009
Photo credit: schoschie
If you have not been aware of the recent news, General Motors and Chrysler have asked the government for more money, but the Obama administration is pushing back. The government’s task force has determined that the restructuring plans submitted by the companies in return for continued financial support are inadequate.
As a result, the Chairman and CEO of General Motors, Rick Wagoner, is resigning from his position and Chrysler is heading towards a possible merger with Fiat. With GM, the government will provide the company with the funds it needs to operate for sixty days. There is a possibility that General Motors will not survive in its current form two months from now. Chrysler, on the other hand, will only have thirty days to turn around a plan for moving forward.
Bankruptcy may be the answer for both companies. To prevent consumer trepidation about buying a car from a company that might not support its obligations like warranties and maintenance, the Treasury Department has stepped in. The government plans to back warranties on all GM and Chrysler vehicles purchased while the companies exist in their current state of collapse or restructuring.
If you typically buy cars from GM and Chrysler, would you be more or less inclined to purchase a vehicle right now? Are you confident your car will receive the support it needs from these companies or the government throughout its usable life?
You can read the full text of President Obama’s remarks today about General Motors and Chrysler here.
A few months short of five years ago, I purchased a new 2004 Honda Civic to replace a failing older model that had not been in my care. Today, this “new” car is passing 100,000 miles on the odometer, and it’s still running great. While I occasionally find my mind wandering towards the purchase of something sportier, at this time, I plan on sticking with the Civic until maintenance costs more than the car is worth. I hope to stretch ownership for another 100,000 miles.
Here are the expenses I’ve put into the car so far:
| Accessories |
$745 |
| Insurance |
$9,894 |
| Interest on Auto Loan |
$413 |
| Fuel |
$7,042 |
| Parking |
$302 |
| Registration |
$239 |
| Service |
$3,208 |
| Tolls |
$3,645 |
The main accessory I purchased was a lower-end GPS device, which was ultimately stolen from the car while it was parked for the weekend in a particularly bad parking space in Queens, New York. I never replaced the device. The next most expensive accessory was a replacement stereo that fully integrated with my iPod. The service category includes regularly scheduled maintenance as well as a slew of oil changes. It also includes my $500 deductible after a “minor” accident, a tire replacement after one was punctured and unrepairable, and a couple of traffic tickets.
I paid off my non-industry auto loan with an interest rate of 2% somewhat quicker to keep my total interest expense down to $413. Also, according to edmunds.com, my car has depreciated a total of $7,580 since it was purchased.
Many of the expenses should be controlled better, and it may be time to re-evaluate my insurance coverage.
Email this article
Print this article
