<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<channel>
<title>Autoblog - Comments for </title>
<link>http://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/04/by-the-numbers-february-2008/</link>
<description>Autoblog Comments for </description>

<language>en-us</language>
<copyright>Copyright 2008 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only.</copyright>
<generator>Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/</generator><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on ]]></title><link>http://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/04/by-the-numbers-february-2008/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/04/by-the-numbers-february-2008/</guid><description><![CDATA[So should have Nissan's when you just look at the above number but the calculations are based on DSR.... daily sales rate not volume. When the extra day for the month is factored in,even though the volume for the month appears up, the daily sales rate is down. ]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[Tony]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Mar 4th 2008 12:18PM</pubDate></item></channel></rss>