Cash For Clunkers, R.I.P.
As noted below, cash for clunkers is deader than my brother's mid-'70s Vega after about 18,000 miles.
Somehow in the bizarro world of government, the program was initially hailed as a huge success because it immediately become three times more expensive than it was expected to be and hence ran through a pile of dough that was supposed to last until November 1.
Hanging out signs that say "Hey Kids, Free Money!" does motivate some people to come running. But now the money's all gone and all were left is, well $3 billion more in debt and the ultimate statement on why the program was misconceived all along, courtesy of Reason.tv:
The automotive site Edmunds.com has noted that C4C helped push buyers most likely to buy in the first place. And it helped push down the need for dealers to offer the incentives they had been using to lure customers in, so dealers "are enjoying a 20 percent increase in gross profit per sale involving a clunker trade-in since the program launched." The site had also noted that interest in the program actually started to wane almost immediately, a product of the originally limited amount ($1 billion) and the fact that only the most-motivated buyers were willing to swap out a clunker (probably with no payment) for a new car with a monthly payment).
In any case, USA Today reports GM and Chrysler, having experienced short-lived sales boosts, are ready to go to their old ways, which is producing more cars than anyone wants to buy.
Gleeful automakers are reacting to the cash-for-clunkers-driven spike in car demand with increased production plans for the third and fourth quarters.
That comes even as one leading industry researcher says the rebate program's appeal is waning and there are few signs a broad recovery has begun.
Oh those gleeful automakers, so full glee and autos! Is there anything they can't do wrong? More here.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
I await with quivering anticipation the government's plan to help Chrysler and GM dispose of all those excess cars in a few months.
The manufacturers are probably just blowing smoke about re-opening plants.
They probably have Obama breathing down their necks saying, "We did this program for you, so now union union union union!" and they have to humor him by saying, "Yes, yes, little One, so eager. We are re-opening plants soon." And then when the time comes they won't do it.
I think I could have supported C4C if the old cars were destroyed by dynamite, and all the explosions were compiled on one DVD.
But shouldn't govt efficiency have insured success? Senator Schumer? Hello?
yes and all of the cars where full of confetti so it would be one big spectacular show, confetti everywhere. Oh shit, I hope there are not any tree huggers in here.
When I think of Cash for Clunkers, I see Kurt Russell navigating a fleet of barely functioning cars through the desert.
Does the car in the "ad" have a Tullock airbag?
Kevin, as Mythbusters has shown us, a true car explosion is not really an exciting thing. There's a bang and a puff of smoke, and the car is gone.
Now the Hollywoodish massive car fires, those are the sheeyat, but they don't really dispose of the car.
My understanding was that many of the dealers refused to make any more C4C deals because they weren't getting paid fast enough. What idiots! And to think, I stood up for these guys. Mainly, because the local GMC dealership had all of their stock repoed by GMAC when they made changes, after they took TARP money. But doing business with the federal government is good business, regardless of your politics. I know one person who amassed a fortune building POS HUD houses and subsidized senior housing complexes in the 70s and 80s. I also know landlords who prefer to rent to Sec 8 recipients because they know they are going to get paid every month. Not wanting to do business with the government is like not wanting to make money. The government always pays, they pay well, and there's not a whole lot of bullshit to deal with (but that varies). And, you don't have to worry about unions, as long as you pay your workers prevailing wage. You just have to wait a while for the money.
The automakers are just gearing up for when C4C 2 inevitably rolls out
I also know landlords who prefer to rent to Sec 8 recipients because they know they are going to get paid every month.
I know landlords who won't touch Section 8 tenants because they trash the place and skip out. No tenant, no check from the government, so the landlord is left with repair costs and vacant units.
The government always pays, they pay well, and there's not a whole lot of bullshit to deal with (but that varies).
In healthcare, the government doesn't always pay (they frequently deny claims on spurious grounds), they never pay well (Medicaid is a terrible payer, Medicare rates don't allow most facilities to even break even), and there is a mountain of bullshit to deal with (thousands of pages of regulations, swarms of bounty-hunter auditors paid on commission, etc. ad infinitum).
Maybe its different in other industries.
And, you don't have to worry about unions, as long as you pay your workers prevailing wage.
WTF? Whether you do biz with the government has nothing to do with whether or not you will be unionized.
You just have to wait a while for the money.
Revenues delayed are revenues denied.
"When I think of Cash for Clunkers, I see Kurt Russell navigating a fleet of barely functioning cars through the desert."
Underrated classic. I own the Laserdisc!
The dealers around here are hurting because of C4C. They are having major cash flow problems due to a lack of timely payment by the government. I think over $10 million is late or hasn't come yet. Something like 3% of dealers have received some money and 97% have received none.
Another shining example of why you don't get in bed with government.
I use to work for a company that did a lot of work for GE. GE paid on net 75. It has recently gone up to 105. They pay slow but they pay well. But, you had to build the delay into your bid.
Illinois Medicare, on the other hand, is 150 days behind right now. And, as mentioned above, they dont pay well either. I dont know why anyone does business with Medicare.
I don't know a single residential real estate investor that want's anything to do with section 8. I did a lot of work for one who literally sold properties at a small loss when he was tired of fighting his properties going section 8.
This is a perfect example of not understanding how businesses work. Monthly or biweekly cash flow is often one of the most important, if not the most important, thing for small businesses. You have bills and payroll, merchandise moving out the door and no money or cash coming in is a swift death blow to any company that can't absorb the short term operation costs.
Local TV stations here are having this exact problem. Plenty of sales, but their AR turnover is rising fast. Which means no cash flow. Which equates to no payroll or operating cash.
Since Ford, the best managed of the big 2.5, is modestly incearsing production I'm not certain that an uptick in U.S. auto sales is Pollyannaish thinking.
IIRC, the auto industry typically leads the nation into and out of recessions.
That quibble aside, the cash for clunkers program only bought people into the showroom that would have been there in the next year anyway. It was an example of the administration and congress's overinflated opinion of their ability to steer an economy* that is far too complex to micromanage.
This will not stop the blue team from declaring the dealer and middle class welfare program a resounding success.
* If you bought the "lower pollution, lesss oil imports" line used to co-justify the fiasco, you are simply too gullible to be discussing policy here an H&R.
For what's been spent (so far) on the clunkers program, there should have been a couple hundred thousand new cars roll off the lots.
I did rough math of $4 billion, an average of $4k per transaction, and that comes to ONE MILLION C4C transactions.
What kind of idiot approves of a government progr- oh, hell, I just answered my own question.
This is a perfect example of not understanding how businesses work.
No. It's a perfect example of not knowing how to bid a job. If you know upfront that you know you're not going to get paid for 90 days, you figure that into the price. I own a business, and I know how to bid a job. If the C4C dealers had understood this simple concept, they could have figured it into the price of the car.
WTF? Whether you do biz with the government has nothing to do with whether or not you will be unionized.
I'm talking about construction unions, not labor unions. There's a big difference.
And regarding Sec 8 housing: It can take up to 6 months to evict someone for non payment of rent in NJ. If a Sec 8 recipient doesn't pay their 30% share, removal from the program occurs in 30 to 60 days.
If you know upfront that you know you're not going to get paid for 90 days, you figure that into the price.
Did the government explain this upfront? GE, using my example above, is very honest about their payment policy. Medicare is not that honest, dont know why C4C would be.
J sub D,
You'll find that it is the housing market that leads the nation into recessions, followed shortly thereafter by cars, durable goods, etc. That has been the case in something like ten out of the last twelve recessions.
Tricky Prickears,
It's a perfect example of not knowing how to bid a job.
This is a pretty good example of why government spending is zero sum and quite wasteful of resources, unlike markets. Who can tell us why?
Sec. 8 housing - like subsidized or rent-controlled housing generally - leads rather quickly to poorly maintained housing. A waste of resources.
Did the government explain this upfront? GE, using my example above, is very honest about their payment policy. Medicare is not that honest, dont know why C4C would be.
In the case of contracts, not only do they let you know upfront, some require multiple bids for 30,60 and 90 day payment.
I guess since I've been around it for so long, I automatically assume 90 days. It's easy for me to say "they (the dealers) should have known". I guess it's not common knowledge to most. My former mechanic got a contract for the vehicles for the USPS regional distribution center. He learned. He eventually got his money, built a new facility, then dropped them. Some people just can't wait. If you can use your own resources to cover the delay in payment, there's less you need to make up than if you have to borrow the money. That's why saving is so important.
More here on the bad economics of Cash for Clunkers: http://www.examiner.com/x-19142-Tucson-Libertarian-Examiner~y2009m8d4-The-bad-economics-of-Cash-for-Clunkers
For those who don't want to read it, think "Broken Window Fallacy."
The problem with C4C is that it isnt a bidding process. The price is set. Money should be "at purchase" like with a standard car transaction.
This is a pretty good example of why government spending is zero sum and quite wasteful of resources, unlike markets. Who can tell us why?
To put it bluntly, business owners just don't give a shit about that. But that's the way government works. Always has, always will. But let's take a contract I bid on last year as an example. It was for specific maintenance work on four Coast Guard housing units in Mass. The government can either, sub contract out that work, or hire permanent employees to handle all of the various maintenance needs of all the housing units. More times than not, it is cheaper to just sub out than work than hire employees to do it. Or, hire perm employees for basic maintenance, and sub out the big jobs. That's the way most big businesses do it. But most big businesses don't require sealed bids for every contract. They have lists of various contractors for the different trades. The government is held to much higher scrutiny for the awarding of contracts than are businesses, for obvious reasons.
Tricky,
You are conflating bid processes with retail purchases. Car purchases are retail, the standard is net 0. If the Feds are going to join the game, they gots to play by the rules, and the rules are cash at time of purchase.
Obviously, they cant meet that standard, but 5 business days after paperwork is filed seems like long enough to me.
The problem with C4C is that it isnt a bidding process. The price is set. Money should be "at purchase" like with a standard car transaction.
No, but car dealers manipulate sticker prices all of the time, for various reasons. Think, free gas for one year! Yeah, after they mark up the sticker to cover that. But that's deception and borderline fraud, right?
Tricky Prickears,
Sure they don't. And I don't expect them too actually. So your point is moot.
No, but car dealers manipulate sticker prices all of the time, for various reasons. Think, free gas for one year! Yeah, after they mark up the sticker to cover that. But that's deception and borderline fraud, right?
What the fuck does that have to do with anything? Dealers play games so the government can delay paying? WTF?
If the Feds are going to join the game, they gots to play by the rules, and the rules are cash at time of purchase.
ROFL
Tricky Prickears,
But that's deception and borderline fraud, right?
That is the reason why you shop around for a car. *doh*
Indeed, with the internet, it is even easier to do that than it used to be.
I would note that most states have laws determining how many car and what type of car dealerships one can have in a definite geographic region. Auto dealerships have a lot of political clout in the states and they exercise it.
I did rough math of $4 billion, an average of $4k per transaction, and that comes to ONE MILLION C4C transactions.
You're assuming 100% efficiency?
Hahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahaha
robc,
Indeed, one of the reasons that U.S. auto companies had such a hard time shedding auto dealerships as well as brands was due to those state laws protecting auto dealerships.
P Brooks,
More specifically it assumes that all C4C transactions will be honored. If I were an auto dealer I'd sit on those cars and wait until I got the cash (and apparently many of them are). Which is an incredible waste of productive resources.
If the C4C dealers had understood this simple concept, they could have figured it into the price of the car.
I think Edmunds did some analysis, and C4C deals were pretty high-margin for the dealers.
Of course, a high-margin deal isn't worth squat if the money doesn't show up in time.
Oh, and this is a good example of how government meddling leads to uncertainty.
I obviously disagree.
NYT, August 19, 2006
This ain't worth having a pissing contest over.
My suspicion is that there's no angle for these dealers to exploit. Let's face it, in a perfect world you shouldn't have to pay the local building inspector just to get him out to the job site. But now, even that is figured into a job. There's so much waste and corruption that eliminating all of it would lead to "systemic failure". 😉
I saw something the other day (can't/won't go search for it) that indicated the cash for clunkers "rebates" are being considered, for economic statistics purposes, as discounts, or some such thing.
My on-the-spot analysis of what was said was that the government specifically intends to cloak the inflationary effect of the operation.
J sub D,
You are wrong sir, and I demand a salmon in compensation! Not an inferior Atlantic salmon, a Pacific salmon! 😉
P Brooks,
Yes. Just like they will cloak the monetizing of the debt we are running up.
If I were an auto dealer I'd sit on those cars and wait until I got the cash (and apparently many of them are).
Apparently, some significant percentage of these sale contracts give the dealer the power to go back to the purchaser if the clunker cash doesn't come through.
P Brooks,
I see the popularity of this program dropping by a significant level if that actually happens.
Follow the money.
Follow the money.
Down the toilet? No fekkin' way, dude.
No, I have to do this my way. You tell me what you know, and I'll confirm. I'll keep you in the right direction if I can, but that's all. Just. . .follow the money.
I see the popularity of this program dropping by a significant level if that actually happens.
You mean the program that just ended?
dealers "are enjoying a 20 percent increase in gross profit per sale involving a clunker trade-in since the program launched."
They'll enjoy it more if they ever get their government money. Most have been waiting weeks for reimbursement. Per the old Seinfeld gag: "You can sell the cars. You just can't pay for the cars."
"You're assuming 100% efficiency?"
I was being sarcastic.
Since my car gets 19 mpg, I have been at a $4500 disadvantage when trying to buy a car. Not very stimulating.
Apparently, some significant percentage of these sale contracts give the dealer the power to go back to the purchaser if the clunker cash doesn't come through.
The frenzy of left wing rage would be a joy to behold if that happens, assuming it isn't all just shoved under the rug.
But automakers say they're confident they're adding just enough inventory to replace cars bought during the clunker spree.
And they'll sell the replacements...how?
Selling cars is not bidding a job. There is lag time built into companies that bid jobs, especially with government entities, I've watched it first hand in small municipalities. You take dealers that are already struggling, their operating cash flow is flat or negative. The government issues a program that increases their sales, but a major portion of that sale is a receivable from the government. The rest is paid in cash from whatever lender the customer uses. Since the margin on cars isn't exactly huge you now have a significant portion of your cash flow tied up in a government payment. People still coming in and buying like mad. Product leaving your inventory. And you are only recovering a portion of your cash flow.
This vastly different and moves much faster than any bid process.
For the record I've been on both ends of bidding jobs involved with governments.
Another thing is notice the time dealers started to back out. And when they started getting upset. A month and a half out and people started to complain and bail. Right about the time car dealers started seriously worrying about making this months payments. They ate July and held out hope, half way through August they decided it was time to stop bleeding inventory and incurring costs without reimbursement.
"They ate July and held out hope, half way through August they decided it was time to stop bleeding inventory and incurring costs without reimbursement."
Heh! And these are the same bozos that want to apply their tired, failed and utterly insane philosophies to 1/6 of the US economy???
"In healthcare, the government doesn't always pay (they frequently deny claims on spurious grounds), they never pay well (Medicaid is a terrible payer, Medicare rates don't allow most facilities to even break even), and there is a mountain of bullshit to deal with (thousands of pages of regulations, swarms of bounty-hunter auditors paid on commission, etc. ad infinitum)."
Very astute R C. Of the Medicare cases I have treated in the past few months, more than half are at least two months overdue with the procedures at much less the true cost (as opposed to self-pay and private third party payers). The reason facilities accept Medicare and Medicaid is gov't imposition (careful whose subsidy you accept: the minute you do, you have made a deal with the Devil*). Essentially, "We'll make it up in volume!" If I didn't have such overhead and enormous student debt, I would'nt accept Medicare/Caid either.
Remember the Golden Rule: He who has the gold (or a goverment money press), makes the rules.
*With Obummer's recent divinely inspired comments, this seems more appropo.
Should have said "procedure reimbursements".
In any case, USA Today reports GM and Chrysler, having experienced short-lived sales boosts, are ready to go to their old ways, which is producing more cars than anyone wants to buy.
Gleeful automakers are reacting to the cash-for-clunkers-driven spike in car demand with increased production plans for the third and fourth quarters.
Wow. How retarded can you get? Having cannibalized their sales for the next few months with the Clunker sales, they're ramping up production because current sales with the now-expiring Clunkers money were good?
They should be scaling back production, not increasing it.
People say it is a good idea to negotiate the new car price before you tell the dealer that you have a clunker!
Jhenry
Blogger
http://www.cashforclunkersfacts.info
http://www.cashforclunkersfacts.info