backtop


Print 172 comment(s) - last by Dan Banana.. on Feb 28 at 8:11 PM

Bob Lutz has had enough of the Volt flaming

Bob Lutz has never been one to back down from a fight. The former Marine has served at a number of car companies over the decades including General Motors, BMW, Ford, and Chrysler. Most recently, Lutz served at GM's Vice Chairman for Special Advisor Design and Global Product Development.
 
When it comes to hardcore "car guys" in the auto industry, there aren't many as rabid as Lutz. In recent years, Lutz is responsible for spearheading the development of enthusiast-oriented vehicles like the fifth-generation Chevrolet Camaro, Pontiac G8, fourth generation Pontiac GTO, Pontiac Solstice/Saturn Sky, and the upcoming Cadillac Converj (now called the ELR).
 
One of Lutz's most famous "babies", however, has been the Chevrolet Volt. He has been an ardent supporter of the plug-in hybrid, so it should come as no surprise that Lutz is coming to the Volt's defense after a barrage of negative press has rained down on it.


[Source: Patrick Arena/VW Vortex]
 
Lutz, writing in a column for Forbes, went straight after those that have been most critical of the Volt. He rattled off six “truths” about the vehicle including the fact that the Volt was conceived before GM's federal bailout and that no Volt has caught fire on public roads during an accident. Lutz also asserted that 278,000 gasoline-engined vehicles caught fire between 2003 and 2007, but no one seemed to launch an attack campaign against those vehicles.
 
But Lutz saved his harshest criticism for the "right-wing media" which has gone after the Volt with many a hollow-point bullet:
 
But the Oscar for totally irresponsible journalism has to go to The O’Reilly Factor on Fox News, with, as its key guest, Lou Dobbs. Amid much jocular yukking, the Volt was depicted as a typical federal failure. In attempting to explain why Chevy has sold fewer than 8,000 Volts, Dobbs states, flatly, “It doesn’t work.” He elaborates, “It doesn’t go fast and go far on electricity. What happens is it catches fire."
 
Lutz then went on to try to clear up any confusion about who enabled the $7,500 tax credit that has been another sore point for people upset over the very existence of the Volt:
 
To top it off, these two media pros lamented the fact that the same government that had forced GM to produce the Volt was now extending $7,500 tax credits towards its purchase, thus squandering even more of “our taxpayer” dollars on this failed Socialist-collectivist flop. Truth? The $7,500 tax credit was enacted under the Bush administration!
 
Lutz’s column comes just days after GM CEO Dan Akerson testified before Congress to defend the Volt's safety record. "The Volt is safe. It's a marvelous machine. It represents so much of what is right at GM and, frankly, American ingenuity and manufacturing," said Akerson in his testimony last week. "The Volt seems, perhaps unfairly, to have become a surrogate for some to offer broader commentary on General Motors' business prospects and administration policy."
 
Late last week, GM introduced a new commercial to put the Volt in a more positive light.

Source: Forbes



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Big Surprise
By Reclaimer77 on 1/31/2012 7:48:41 PM , Rating: -1
quote:
The former Marine has served at a number of car companies over the decades including General Motors, BMW, Ford, and Chrysler.


Great track record there...

So after running 50% of the companies he worked for into the ground to the point that they needed federal bailouts, he takes the defensive position GM and the Volt?

WOW, really, big shock there. Couldn't see that one coming.




RE: Big Surprise
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 1/31/2012 7:51:07 PM , Rating: 5
Hmm... I don't actually see you attacking the points he made in the article...


RE: Big Surprise
By Reclaimer77 on 1/31/12, Rating: -1
RE: Big Surprise
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 1/31/2012 8:09:42 PM , Rating: 5
If you think it's just those two on Fox News that are after the Volt, you're sorely mistaken.

Fox News/Fox Business has been after the Volt for quite a while:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NkaOo4RxXNE&feature...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JQ8o8p1jYPY&feature...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rxOUkw-x5MU&feature...

I could find more examples, but Big Bang Theory is on TBS ;)


RE: Big Surprise
By Reclaimer77 on 1/31/12, Rating: 0
RE: Big Surprise
By Amedean on 1/31/2012 10:47:09 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
And how stupid it is to try and blame such an insignificant percentage of media for the Volt's poor showing. Which was selling poorly, I might add, before ANY stories of exploding cars came out.


PR is everything. So many people criticize the Volt and never driven one - now thats bias!

quote:
Anyway nobody is "after" the Volt.


Speak for yourself, I really want one! I love it, test driven it was silent, comfortable and guess what - more domestic energy is used!

quote:
The American people, by an absolute MASSIVE majority, was against the GM/Chrysler bailouts.


It depends from what angle your talking about. The bailouts (loans which are paid back) were certainly bitter sweet for me but I feel we made the right decision to do so reflecting. The big banks are the only industries that actually received a bailout (not paid back).

quote:
If you want dissenting opinions to be silent and support a biased mainstream media who wants to cheer-lead tax money being used for these kinds of things, I don't know what kind of journalist supports that.


This is a rant...... "biased mainstream media" I assume you mean anything but Fox News. Its like their pot kettle slogan and rarely any other network uses this term.


RE: Big Surprise
By Reclaimer77 on 1/31/12, Rating: -1
RE: Big Surprise
By Amedean on 1/31/2012 11:07:16 PM , Rating: 2
That article is misleading (naturally). The Treasury forcast included AIG and other banks - not specifically GM.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100014240529702047...


RE: Big Surprise
By Reclaimer77 on 1/31/12, Rating: -1
RE: Big Surprise
By Amedean on 1/31/2012 11:24:42 PM , Rating: 2
I need to clarify my messy message, I meant it was a loan and the banks received grants. I imagine there may be some of the GM loan that is not paid back, but it clearly is nowhere near what you described. Keep in mind there are still payments the government will receive.

I don't think you understand that the government owns shares of these TARP companies (banks included). The Treasury is calculating loss from money when the shares lose value. So when they sell their shares back to these companies they get money back.

Your homework assignment for tonight is to do a little more research and at least read the first paragraph instead of reading just headlines and posting bad information.


RE: Big Surprise
By FredEx on 1/31/2012 11:51:36 PM , Rating: 2
Also, there is nothing in the calculation on the long line of jobs it saved and what that meant to the economy. Several of my family, where they work, are down the line from the car companies and who they work for would have been devastated if any of them would have shut down.


RE: Big Surprise
By Amedean on 1/31/2012 11:54:35 PM , Rating: 2
I completely agree which is why it was bitter sweet.


RE: Big Surprise
By Reclaimer77 on 2/1/12, Rating: 0
RE: Big Surprise
By Amedean on 2/1/2012 1:48:27 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
And there goes your objectivity and thus credibility on this topic. Lots of people have lost their jobs. But as long as your family members kept theirs through a bailout, hey, it's all good!


Don't pull a Gingrich and dodge my points by attacking someone elses credibility. You made too many failed accusations to be attacking someone on credibility - with credibility.

If you ask what points, reread this thread because there are several dead-end tangents.


RE: Big Surprise
By Reclaimer77 on 2/1/2012 4:15:53 AM , Rating: 1
You're arguing about points on an action that was fundamentally wrong in the first place. Even if I'm wrong on all the points, that doesn't matter. What happened with GM was a travesty and is something that the Federal Government simply was never granted the power to do. How can it sit right with you that the Federal Government owns 25% of our largest auto-maker? Please tell me.

Not sure what's so hard to understand about that position. I'm taking a shellacking on this one, as expected. But even I can't believe that many people are supporting what happened. I suspect it's more about GM's new "green" outlook, than the actual bailout. Even though they sell just as many trucks and SUV's as before, public perception is everything.

Telling me that I must support crony capitalism and a massive miss-use of treasury funds because the ends justified the means, while making comments about MY credibility, just doesn't wash.


RE: Big Surprise
By Kurz on 2/1/2012 4:40:33 AM , Rating: 2
Yes your specific family would be devastated, however the inflation, debt, and the consquences of the Federal Government having more power would have caused more issues. Such as debt, miss-allocation of resources, many things you can't directly see.

It would be less devesatating to the economy if they would have entered bankruptsy and shedded their debt, restructered and came out a stronger leaner company.

Many companies enter bankruptsy and come out better than ever. Short term gains usually hurt long term outcomes.


RE: Big Surprise
By theapparition on 2/1/2012 9:59:30 AM , Rating: 2
Your lack of knowledge on the situation hurts your understanding.

If GM had tried to go into bankruptcy court without the governments backing, they would have been liquidated......not emerge as a stronger company. There was no restructuring option. In the end, they did go into bankruptcy, just with the governments backing.

I'm not attempting to take sides on the issue, just clarifying what would have happened.


RE: Big Surprise
By Kurz on 2/1/2012 10:17:14 AM , Rating: 2
They most likely wouldn't have been liquidated (Chrysler was more likely though there was a significant chance they wouldn't have been liquidated).

They spent their time and efforts appealing to the Federal Government instead of trying to write up their Bankruptcy Papers. They were not willing to give up anything on the issue so they lobbied. They were given loans and grants only to be backed by the Federal Government again though bankruptsy.

I read up significantly on the issue and there was a way out for these companies through the normal means and still maintain independence without being liquidated.


RE: Big Surprise
By Reclaimer77 on 2/1/2012 11:18:25 AM , Rating: 2
True but that would have allowed GM to get out from under the UAW, so of course, that wasn't an option anyone in Washington wanted to face.


RE: Big Surprise
By Kurz on 2/1/2012 4:44:16 AM , Rating: 2
Though you are forgetting the amount of inflation incurred to bail out these companies. Money that never existed before created for the specific purpose to bailout these companies. This inflation which devalues all of the rest of the money currently in circulation.


RE: Big Surprise
By Kurz on 2/1/2012 4:47:13 AM , Rating: 2
This was pointed towards Amedean


RE: Big Surprise
By Jeffk464 on 2/1/2012 11:15:27 AM , Rating: 2
Exactly the real judge of a car is customer satisfaction and volt does seem to have that. Of course from the companies point of view its how profitable the car is.


RE: Big Surprise
By Just Tom on 1/31/2012 8:14:51 PM , Rating: 5
His points are silly. O'Rielly =/= the right wing media, plenty of left and mainstream media has written stories critical of the Volt. When the car was getting accolades it did not really deserve Lutz had no problem basking in the limelight. The fact that Bush signed the Energy Improvement and Extension Act of 2008? You know what would have been a real point: An explanation of why that despite initially glowing press and an enormously supportive federal no one wants a Volt? Or maybe an explanation that the Volt was seen as a strategic product whose final sales are of lesser concern than finding a way to produce an EV that people want.

Yeah, the press went overboard with the fire thing. But they also went overboard in their initial gushing over the vehicle. For whatever reason the Volt is a rock star, and rock stars get overly glowing praise when they are going well and ridicule when they are not. Deal with it Lutz.


RE: Big Surprise
By JasonMick (blog) on 1/31/2012 8:25:33 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Yeah, the press went overboard with the fire thing. But they also went overboard in their initial gushing over the vehicle. For whatever reason the Volt is a rock star, and rock stars get overly glowing praise when they are going well and ridicule when they are not. Deal with it Lutz.

I think that's a reasonably analogy.

Love or hate the Volt, you have to give GM credit for going big. It could have tried to make the next sh1tty Prius clone, but instead it pulled off something that is truly world-class.

Sure the Volt has had its problems, but the car is THE first PHEV. PHEVs are much more promising that BEVs like the Leaf as they aren't as range confined. But they're also technically much more challenging due to the hybrid drivetrain, coupled with the fact that you've gone in HEV from asking for a bit of an electric boost to asking for full-on highway speed all-electric performance and gas performance.

I think the unfortunate thing is that the media didn't really frame the vehicle properly when posting about its potential problems.

Ultimately, you can cry bias, but the thing ended up being no more flammable than your average car, based on what I've read.

But I would agree it was not just FOX News who was ragging on the Volt -- CNN, MSNBC and other liberal outlets chimed in... a la:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/46078220

I do think FOX News got a little MORE over the top in their commentary than most, but it was a problem beyond just FOX and conservative media


RE: Big Surprise
By Reclaimer77 on 1/31/2012 9:02:17 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Love or hate the Volt, you have to give GM credit for going big.


GM was handed billions of dollars, damn right they can "go big"! You act like they were taking a big risk and we should give them a medal.

quote:
It could have tried to make the next sh1tty Prius clone


I agree. Instead they did something even smarter. The Cruz and Cruz Eco. The Cruz is the REAL saving grace of GM, yet gets completely overshadowed by Volt hype. Without the Cruz, GM would be in serious trouble.

Seriously if I was GM I would be riding the Cruz like my old lady. This is a car that people are actually BUYING. There's demand! It's everything the Volt isn't.

Instead Lutz, proving he's anything but forward thinking, devotes national press time to ignore his top seller and promote more ill-will between GM and the public. Attacking the "media" and defending a car that people are NOT buying. The LAST thing he should be focusing on is the bailout and the Volt. Why remind people of GM's sorted past when he could be talking about what a hit the Cruz is!?

p.s. Check your mail! :P


RE: Big Surprise
By Reclaimer77 on 1/31/2012 9:10:15 PM , Rating: 2
ARGH! Edit. Cruze, not Cruz. *slaps forehead*


RE: Big Surprise
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 1/31/2012 9:16:11 PM , Rating: 3
Isn't it time to put a ring on that old lady's finger? :)


RE: Big Surprise
By Reclaimer77 on 1/31/2012 9:30:42 PM , Rating: 2
Hey get off of my old lady and back onto the Cruze!

Oh wait...:P


RE: Big Surprise
By JasonMick (blog) on 1/31/2012 11:05:21 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Hey get off of my old lady and back onto the Cruze!

Oh wait...:P


Wow your comment puts this in a whole new light...
quote:
I would be riding the Cruz like my old lady

Methinks my brain wants to unthink what it just thought. :)


RE: Big Surprise
By JasonMick (blog) on 1/31/2012 11:03:02 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
GM was handed billions of dollars, damn right they can "go big"! You act like they were taking a big risk and we should give them a medal.


Why are we in the GM mess in the first place?

True, the government intervention with GM was an extreme action, which has had deep economic effects both negative and positive. Extremists will emphasize either the negative or positive and mix the gray that is this complex issue.

As much as I appreciate opinions like:
http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/a-successful-ipo-do...

Historical scenarios like post-WWI Germany show the aftermath of the collapse of a nation's mega-corporations.

But if corporate collapse necessitates federal intervention, does that mean it's the best case scenario? Absolutely not.

It's kind of like if you've been getting poisoned for years and your kidneys are destroyed, it may be better to live the rest of your life on dialysis than to die. But both choices are undesirable.

The poison to the U.S. economy that has created "too big to fail" is tax favoritism.

Tax favoritism is perhaps the one single biggest factor that has created the "too big to fail" issue, although other factors like lax antitrust enforcement have also played a role.

Tax favoritism is defined by an ambiguous corporate tax system, massive and blatant federal campaign finance corruption, and a societal sentiment in which corporations feel entitled to abuse and exploit the system as far as they can.

Again, I believe that if you examine the fundamental economics of this, it gets back to the fact that privileged corporations are taxed on profits anywhere from 0-20 percent (or even a negative rate) via the combined effects of tax holidays, loopholes, etc.

At the same time SMBs are taxed at a much higher rate 30-40 percent. So they have an almost insurmountable challenge to become a competitor in a high capital industry, because there's not only the investment barrier, there's the barrier of tax favoritism.

A study indicates of 280 of the top Fortune 500 corporations, they only paid on average 18.5% in federal taxes on profits.
http://www.economist.com/blogs/dailychart/2011/11/...

Another good read:
http://seekingalpha.com/article/263982-why-ge-appl...

WRT to GM specifically:
http://money.cnn.com/2011/02/23/news/companies/gm_...

It is estimated for every $1 paid in political lobbying, a company gets $220 in federal tax breaks :
http://www.business.ku.edu/news/releases/20090501-...

The problem is this:
As a SMB (say a Tesla-like firm without the DOE backing Tesla had) you have a Herculean task ahead of you. Let's say you've gone to Harvard Business School and can smooze with the best of them and score a cool $100M USD in venture capital. Great. But now you must compete paying a tax rate of ~35% on any profits you make, versus big guy one and two who are paying ~10%.

It's as if you're on the playground and you're the skinny computer geek and you've boldly decided to pick a fight with Bruno the burly football player. You might stand a chance, as fortune favors the bold. But all of the sudden your teacher tells you that while you can fight Bruno, you must fight with one arm and tied behind your back.

It's a fight SMBs cannot win in many cases.

And hence the corporations become too big to fail.

The issue is that no party is looking to change this as they all have their hands in the cookie jar (yes, even "Tea Party" members, in many cases). Bush did it. Obama did it.

The problem is that government is touching big business, and big business, in its perverted state likes how it feels. It wants to be government's special beloved. But it's not so subtly looking to manipulate the government to squelch competition and boost profits.

... but I digress...

On Why I think you can dislike GM's tax favoritism, but still like some of what GM is doing

GM's favoritism is one issue while the Volt is another.

You can appreciate the Volt without bemoaning the increasingly awkward situation that has evolved between GM and the U.S. gov't not overnight, but over the century (via tax favoritism fueling "too big to fail" expansion).

GM could have released a dozen sh1tty prius clones, as I said. Instead it went for a big shot. Regardless of all the federal handouts, it was still in no better shape than Ford.

But it had a bold vision with the Volt, much as Ford did with SYNC.

At the end of the day this may be somewhat correlated to its "funding", but ultimately has merits independent of the funding.

quote:
I agree. Instead they did something even smarter. The Cruz and Cruz Eco. The Cruz is the REAL saving grace of GM, yet gets completely overshadowed by Volt hype. Without the Cruz, GM would be in serious trouble.

True, absolutely. The thing is very impressive.

But I think the same sentiment (high risk, high reward) that bred the Cruz bred the Volt. The Volt was just a little TOO futurist to succeed in the current market.
quote:
Instead Lutz, proving he's anything but forward thinking, devotes national press time to ignore his top seller and promote more ill-will between GM and the public. Attacking the "media" and defending a car that people are NOT buying. The LAST thing he should be focusing on is the bailout and the Volt. Why remind people of GM's sorted past when he could be talking about what a hit the Cruz is!?

Well this is General Lutz we're talking about. Politically correctness and Lutz are about as foreign concepts as they come.

And yes, you shall be receiving a response shortly... long day!


RE: Big Surprise
By theapparition on 2/1/2012 10:51:15 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
But I think the same sentiment (high risk, high reward) that bred the Cruz bred the Volt. The Volt was just a little TOO futurist to succeed in the current market.

I think this is a great point.

GM has always been too far ahead in some tech, and if they'd have continued the tech, they'd reap a lot of rewards. Instead, the cancelled or killed a lot of products that were way ahead of their time.

GM had a lot of turbocharged engines, but the tech was immature and they canceled most things with a turbo. Even now, much of the culture has favored superchargers rather than turbos, and that's only recently.

GM was first with a EV. Imagine if they'd continued a lot of that tech instead of scrapping the idea.

GM had the best small eco-car line at the time. Cars like the Geo Metro were getting 50mpg in the 90s. Imagine GMs fortunes if they would have had the Geo line when gas prices soared.

Here's just three examples of technology and products that is taking off. GM was just too far ahead of it's time, and missed the market window.


RE: Big Surprise
By Jeffk464 on 2/1/2012 11:19:08 AM , Rating: 2
Longer range but also much more complicated and more expensive to produce. Nope I would rather go with something like the Ford Focus electric, I couldn't stomach driving something that looks like the leaf.


RE: Big Surprise
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 1/31/2012 7:55:26 PM , Rating: 2
And another thing, Lutz wasn't the CEO of any of those car companies, so I don't see how you could pin any blame on him...

However, his most prominent leadership role was at Chrysler during its most booming period, the 90s. He left in '98.


RE: Big Surprise
By Reclaimer77 on 1/31/2012 8:03:23 PM , Rating: 3
Oh please Brandon. Have some credibility on this. Did you even Wiki the man? He had very high level executive positions. Hell he ran Chrysler's Global Product Development department. You can't claim he's blameless either way.

quote:
However, his most prominent leadership role was at Chrysler during its most booming period, the 90s. He left in '98.


/facepalm

Yeah after their FIRST federal bailout in 1975. Forgot about that one?

Speaking of credibility..

"On February 9, 2009, GM announced that Lutz would step down on April 1, 2009, from his position as Vice Chairman of Global Product Development, to take an advisory role. He was to retire from GM at the end of 2009. Lutz said that one reason for his decision was the increasing regulatory climate in Washington that would force him to design what Federal regulators wanted, rather than what customers wanted. Lutz has expressed skepticism on the issue of global warming."

Talk about a colossal flip-flop...


RE: Big Surprise
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 1/31/2012 8:15:36 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
So after running 50% of the companies he worked for into the ground to the point that they needed federal bailouts

quote:
Yeah after their FIRST federal bailout in 1975. Forgot about that one?


So Lutz was at Chrysler in the late 70s and early 80s...?


RE: Big Surprise
By Shig on 1/31/12, Rating: -1
RE: Big Surprise
By Reclaimer77 on 1/31/2012 8:40:49 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Right wing media have made claims that the Chevy Volt's batteries catch fire and 'explode' while driving. This is blatantly false.


Show me proof that they said specifically "while driving". And if they did, that is totally false of course. I'm not going to defend lies or misinformation. You act as if you expect me to.

quote:
Right wing media have made claims that the Chevy Volt was completely funded using taxpayer 'bailout' money. This is blatantly false.


Splitting hairs are we? Without the bailout, there most likely wouldn't BE a Chevy Volt on the road. So is this really a mis-statement? Or just a different point a view?

quote:
Right wing media have made claims that the Chevy Volt is already a failure due to sales numbers. This is blatantly false. The Toyota Prius sold ~5500 units its first year, and it cost half as much. A completely brand new and expensive technology selling 8500+ units it's first year is a success in my book.


You are blatantly wrong here. GM deliberately inflated Volt sales by using thousands of Government fleet purchases. Do you think counting those as "sales" is a legitimate and honest way of reporting the facts? Hell no.

quote:
Right win media have claimed the Volt was 'recalled' due to horrible fire issues.


ALL MEDIA was reporting this. Not "right-wing". Nice try.

You got nothing Shig. Just another leftist moron. Thanks for playing.


RE: Big Surprise
By Shig on 1/31/2012 8:50:27 PM , Rating: 2
Well in the long run numbers will tell the tale, lets see how things go in 2012. Thank you for proving my point about you though.


RE: Big Surprise
By Reclaimer77 on 1/31/2012 8:51:28 PM , Rating: 2
What point? What did I say that wasn't completely true or rational?


RE: Big Surprise
By Shig on 1/31/2012 9:53:13 PM , Rating: 2
Truth and rationality are things you will never understand sir.


RE: Big Surprise
By Kurz on 2/1/2012 4:25:27 AM , Rating: 2
He owned you here.
I think you should just shutup and learn something.


RE: Big Surprise
By tanjali on 1/31/12, Rating: 0
RE: Big Surprise
By YashBudini on 2/1/2012 12:02:17 PM , Rating: 2
Nobody's paying him. Generating hatred is just the current drug of choice.


RE: Big Surprise
By Spuke on 1/31/2012 11:28:16 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
You got nothing Shig. Just another leftist moron. Thanks for playing.
LMAO!!! Can I use this as my forum sig?


RE: Big Surprise
By Reclaimer77 on 2/1/2012 11:20:03 AM , Rating: 2
With my blessing Spuke :)


RE: Big Surprise
By Masospaghetti on 2/1/2012 12:58:27 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Splitting hairs are we? Without the bailout, there most likely wouldn't BE a Chevy Volt on the road. So is this really a mis-statement? Or just a different point a view?

The right wing media like to portray the Volt as Obama's golden child and directly funded by his administration when the Volt itself was conceived and developed independently of the government, before the bailout even occured. It's not splitting hairs - this is a major bashing point the media uses, and its completely incorrect.
quote:
You are blatantly wrong here. GM deliberately inflated Volt sales by using thousands of Government fleet purchases.

The federal government bought 131 Volts in May 2011. Do you have any data showing they bought "thousands"?


RE: Big Surprise
By Reclaimer77 on 2/1/2012 1:04:04 PM , Rating: 1
Obama made the Volt his "golden child" you idiot. He was on TV with the damn thing! He's overflowing the praise on the Volt. It's practically all he's been talking about. Hello?

I said "Government" fleet purchases. That means states too.

You can dick around with the numbers all you want. The fact is consumers, people spending their own money, are simply not buying the Volt.


RE: Big Surprise
By Masospaghetti on 2/1/2012 10:20:18 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Obama made the Volt his "golden child" you idiot. He was on TV with the damn thing! He's overflowing the praise on the Volt. It's practically all he's been talking about. Hello?...I said "Government" fleet purchases. That means states too.

I asked for a facts, any reference to your claim and you cannot provide one. Instead you insult me. Great way to earn credibility.

The car and the president have very little to do with each other. You're right, Obama "endorsed" the Volt. That doesn't mean it was his idea - because it simply wasn't. Tax dollars were not used to develop the car, nor was the car conceived by some evil Democrats in a back room to force EVs onto the general public.


RE: Big Surprise
By Samus on 2/1/2012 11:39:16 AM , Rating: 2
That is true, Lutz is responsible for the God-awful Neon and PT Cruiser.

As crappy as they were, they did sell quite well.


"This week I got an iPhone. This weekend I got four chargers so I can keep it charged everywhere I go and a land line so I can actually make phone calls." -- Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki