Jim Press and Chrysler clarify hybrid subsidy comments
Jim Press has found that his comments have landed him somewhere between a rock and a hard place, with his current position at Chrysler on the one hand and his former employers at Toyota on the other. In an interview with BusinessWeek, Press claimed that the Japanese government had directly subsidized the development of the Prius hybrid. Toyota spokesmen were quick to refute Press' comments, pointing out that their former executive had given statements directly to the contrary in the past, including testimony to the U.S. House of Representatives. Chrysler, in turn, has now issued a statement clarifying its president's remarks. A release posted on the company's Firehouse media blog claims that Press was "not speaking negatively of Toyota." The Japanese auto giant would clearly disagree, but the statement goes on to clarify that Press' comments were intended to highlight the need for closer cooperation between Washington and the Big 3, along the lines of the relationship which Press claimed exists between Japanese government and industry. Hardly a reversal of position, and somehow we doubt this will be the end of the row.
For more details, follow the link to BusinessWeek's follow-up article and read Chrysler's statement in full after the jump.
[Source: Chrysler and BusinessWeek]
Chrysler Statement on Jim Press Comments on Hybrid Battery Development
There have been several news reports today concerning statements made by Chrysler LLC Vice Chairman and President Jim Press on battery development for hybrid vehicles. First of all, Press was not speaking negatively of Toyota.
In a recent interview, he referenced the close cooperation between the Japanese government and Japanese industry. He said the Japanese government strongly supported R & D (research and development) investment in battery development, and the Prius and other Japanese models benefited from that investment in industry.
He cited this as an example of cooperation between government and industry working together on public policy issues. He went on to say that he would like to see similar cooperation in the United States in order to find technological improvements that help give U.S. companies a competitive advantage.
There have been several news reports today concerning statements made by Chrysler LLC Vice Chairman and President Jim Press on battery development for hybrid vehicles. First of all, Press was not speaking negatively of Toyota.
In a recent interview, he referenced the close cooperation between the Japanese government and Japanese industry. He said the Japanese government strongly supported R & D (research and development) investment in battery development, and the Prius and other Japanese models benefited from that investment in industry.
He cited this as an example of cooperation between government and industry working together on public policy issues. He went on to say that he would like to see similar cooperation in the United States in order to find technological improvements that help give U.S. companies a competitive advantage.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
The Other Bob 9:59AM (4/03/2008)
"not speaking negatively of Toyota."
Oh god forbid anyone speak negatively of Toyota.
Reply
compy386 10:03AM (4/03/2008)
I've seen the cost of hybrid programs and if Toyota's hybrid program is profitable, then I wouldn't be surprised if government money was used to make it profitable. All governements subsidize industries. Japan supports its autos and we have cheap corn... I miss soft drinks with sugar in them.
Reply
Disgruntled Goat 10:14AM (4/03/2008)
I wonder how many jobs a thriving auto industry provides compared to the corn business?
The Other Bob 3:46PM (4/03/2008)
"I wonder how many jobs a thriving auto industry provides compared to the corn business?"
A lot more and they pay better too.
tankd0g 1:02PM (4/03/2008)
The American government made Prius sales possible with tax credits for early buyers. The same credits were available to the big three at the time, if they had something to bring to the table besides a full sized SUV.
J.Crew 10:05AM (4/03/2008)
He is a sell out with no credibility after leaving the number one company in the world to go to a tiny player in the USA. The US government will not subsidize the auto industry the way they are proping up the equity markets even though the auto sector has needed this help for a much longer time. The government could care less about the auto sector.
Reply
That One Person 4:23PM (4/03/2008)
1) How is he a sell out? He left a job for another one. Big deal. So is Mullaly a sellout? Is Nardelli a sellout? Hmmm. So I must be a sellout for leaving my previous job to go to a job that paid better. He was with Toyota for the better part of a half century. If I were in his position, I would have left, too. And seeing as he played a part in helping Toyota become "Number One", I think this guy has some credibility. He was pretty high up and knew how things were run.
2) The government not caring about the auto industry is a big deal. So you think it's ok that the European and Japenese governments help out their auto industry?
J.Crew 12:54AM (4/04/2008)
Press jumped ship for money and that is it. At his age he is looking for a bigger golden parachute and found it with Cerberus. Do I think he has the chops to turn around a company? No. He was the right guy at the right time at Toyota to ride the sales wave. I am sure he is competent, but he is no Carlos Ghosn or Bob Lutz. Press is a steady Eddy. Mullaly is a true leader doing a good job of learning this industry and applying best practices to Ford. Nardelli is a slash and burn guy with his head rammed far up his a$$ in regards to what actually needs to be done to turn Chrysler around.
Yes, I think it is ok that those countries assist their people build a strong and healthy auto industry. Why not do something for the good of the majority? I think the US government should care about its own national treasures that once ruled the automotive world. They don't care because the Detroit 3 don't line their pockets like other industries do (oil and military) as well as having the imports investing in new facilities down in the south like they are creating new employment. They basically transfered all the jobs that used to exist in Michigan down south.
Aggrazel 10:19AM (4/03/2008)
That guy looks like droopy dog.
Reply
judd 10:27AM (4/03/2008)
He misspoke.
Reply
Brent 1:41PM (4/03/2008)
How so?
chrisdavis 11:15AM (4/03/2008)
In other words, "I'm sorry if you were offended."
Reply
Drake 11:35AM (4/03/2008)
What if the U.S. government knew that the Janpanese government was funding hybrid development? Would there be backlash now?
Reply
c 12:19PM (4/03/2008)
Yes,Toyota loses money on every hrbrid especially when first introduced,and Yes the Japanese government heavily subsidized Toyota,Jim Press must be relieved now he is working for a Real, honest company instead of a scum bag,decietful company Toyota is..hell they bought out journelists to praise their rusting hulks of cars (toyota echo rusted out floor boards in 6 months,prev.generation tundra's frames history as well)
J crew Second how is he a sell out,many people move from one company to another sell out..no he just couldnt stand working for a scum company anymore..
Reply
tankd0g 12:51PM (4/03/2008)
Chrysler got itself it's very own Maximum bob! It seems you can have one too, just cherry pick an executive out of a sucessful company just as he's on his way to the retirement home.
Reply
tankd0g 12:54PM (4/03/2008)
The US is heavily subsidizing E85 which seems to only be benifiting GM, but it wouldn't be the first time those living in the glass house threw stones.
Reply
Richard 2:25PM (4/03/2008)
Our government subsidizes ethanol. It also subsidized those large SUVs that we love to hate.
Reply
Glenn 3:13AM (4/04/2008)
The E85 actually had nothing to do with the auto industry. It came down to the government paying farmers to grow corn at higher prices then the market would normally allow. This lead to shortages of other crops and thus higher prices.
End result .. tax payers pay for corn crops .. and consumers pay higher prices the other crops too.
Everyone had long known alcohol from crops does not make sense given the current technology -- it is like the tar-sands but worse as far as efficiency.
Maybe memory serves badly here; but I could have sworn the environmentalist came down hard on alcohol because it damaged the ozone.
Only in US politics ...
Richard 9:46PM (4/04/2008)
While it is true that ethanol as a fuel is primarily about farm policy, it is a stretch to claim that it has nothing to do with the automobile industry. Currently, gasohol is being touted as an alternative to fossil fuel. In North America, this is a relatively recent development. Brazil has used alcohol as a fuel source for decades.
However, ethanol is mandated in Federal law as the oxygenate fuel additive in metropolitan areas where air pollution is a major problem. "Oxygenated" fuel additives are the prescription for cleaner burning fuel in internal combustion engines. This is not my field, but I have serious questions about it as a long-term solution to air pollution. Oxygenates also serve to raise the octane rating of fuel and that's a good thing. At any rate, Big Oil choose MBTE (methyl tertiary-butyl ether) as its oxygenate.
The farm lobby leveraged fears about the contamination of surface and ground water from leaking underground storage tanks to get the Feds to force Big Oil to switch from MBTE to ethanol. I have no idea how much danger MBTE poses for the environment and the public. However, only an idiot would claim that it is safer than ethanol.
The takeaway message is that ethanol has played a significant role in North American automobile policy for years now. The fact that the Government views it as a major component of our agriculture policy notwithstanding.
superdart 9:01PM (4/03/2008)
How is E85 only helping GM?
Last time I checked, many of Chryslers vehicles were E85 compatible.
Reply