Autoblog

Red light cameras are nothing more than a surreptitious tax. Oh sure, they're sold to municipalities as a safety benefit, but what else would you say if you wanted to be paid to install, administrate, and monitor your little ticket-writing bots? The cities and towns that put the cameras greedily snap up the extra revenue generated by dangerously short yellow lights and overzealous cameras. Patrick Bedard has been poking holes in the theory that traffic cameras are the salve for behind the wheel idiocy, and a recent study by the University of South Florida Public Health agrees that the cameras actually cause accidents. Other studies also back up the findings that drivers are quicker to slam on their brakes at yellow lights when they spot the cameras. While it should not play out with a rear ending, nobody maintains a safe following distance, or even pays attention. In some cases, the rate of red light running is low enough that the cameras cause a spike in incidents, proving that the cure can sometimes be worse than the sickness.

[Source: Kicking Tires, Photo: Morning Chu Hi]

Don't go getting too excited, it probably won't mean a crate version of the S65 or N54 for Roundel fans. Running an automaker is expensive, especially a manufacturer that leans more toward niche status than casting a wide net. BMW is looking at all options for future revenue, and one of the thoughts that's occured to the well-respected manufacturer of cars with chutzpah is to bank on its engineering chops and sell engines to other carmakers. Lotus has pimped themselves out for years to other automakers, and the Porsche name has ended up on things like hard drives, so BMW selling their award-winning engines to gain an extra stream of return on their investment is a far less radical move. Hey, if selling their more mundane powerplants to emerging markets like India and China keeps the coffers full and awesome performers rolling our way, we're all for it.

[Source: Motor Authority]

The business world has always confounded us for being a place where one can celebrate with champagne after not posting a profit for three months, if only for the fact that you didn't lose as much money as people thought you would. Such is the case with General Motors, which today announced that it had lost "only" $115 million this quarter. Those pesky "special items" in the ledger amount to $644 million for GM and include money that's been spent to aid the reorganization of Delphi and "goodwill impairment" on GMAC (from what we gather, it's a reevaluation of the finance company's worth). Excluduing special items, GM actually posted a net income of $529 million on revenue of $48.8 billion, which is a marked improvement over last year's adjusted loss of $1.1 billion and comes mainly from the good old fashioned practice of selling cars and trucks. General Motors also was able to fine tune the amount of money it expects to spend on Delphi, which previously was thought to be between $5.5 and $12 billion, but now looks to be between $6.0 and $7.5 billion.

On the auto side of things, GM's global market share was 13.9% percent in Q3, up slightly from the second quarter but below the 14.4% it recorded in Q3 2005. In the all important North American market, however, GM captured 25.1% of consumers' hearts and wallets, the best quarter it's had this year. GM North America still reported a loss of $367 million in Q3, but again, it's an improvement of $1.3 billion over last year this time and was acheived despite producing 96,000 fewer vehicles (likely the result of lower rental and fleet sales).

You can check out GM's full press release for more details after the jump.

[Source: GM]

Porsche's sales figures are in for the 2006 fiscal year, and profits are up by over ten percent to a staggering €7.27 billion. Production grew by nearly thirteen percent over last year, putting out more than 100,000 cars over the year.

Some would be inclined to attribute the record sales, profits and revenues to Porsche's drifting away from its core values with the Cayenne sport-ute, but the bulk of the success is attributed to the 911 and the new Cayman, pure sportscars through and through, while Cayenne sales dropped.

While most sportscar-makers are owned by larger automotive conglomerates – Ferrari by Fiat, Lamborghini by VW, Aston Martin by Ford (for now) – in Stuttgart, it's the other way around. Porsche's increasing financial success has enabled them to buy an increasing stake in the VW Group, in turn giving Porsche partial control over the full range of brands including Volkswagen, Audi, Seat, Skoda, Bentley, Lamborghini and Bugatti.

Porsche isn't planning on resting on its tire-treads either, with ambitious plans to expand in growing markets in Russia, China and the Middle East, and new models on the way .

(Follow the jump for the full press release.)

[Source: Porsche AG via Motor Authority]

Earlier this week we posted about how General Motors' reported first quarter $323 million loss became a $445 million profit. And this is not by some accounting fluke: analysis of the automaker's finances shows the profit stemmed from its cost-management strategies and higher revenue from sales such as its new Buick Lucerne and Cadillac vehicles. Of course, postponing the addition of its $681 million health care settlement with Delphi to the books didn't hurt either.

But analysts are wary. Eric Noble of The CarLab points out that, outside of its full-sized SUVs, none of GM's vehicles are top-notch. The automaker will lose half its income from its financial arm once the GMAC sale is completed. Finally, a union strike against GM's major parts supplier Delphi would have GM burning through savings within months if not sooner.

But the greatest threat to GM's recovery comes from rising gas prices. Inventory of its new large SUVs is beginning to increase as SUV demand softens. Frederick Henderson, vice-president and CFO of GM forsees a worse situation for the company if normally loyal truck owners migrate en masse to purchasing sedans.

More details can be found at the link.

[Source: Business Week]

Every driver  is feeling the pinch at the pump these days, but the skyrocketing cost of gasoline is affecting more than just your commuting habits. Ordering out for pizza? You might want to reconsider the pepperoni. Having flowers delivered to your sweetie? Might want to switch the roses for carnations. Need a landscaper? Take a look in the mirror-- because the rise in oil prices is leading service-based businesses of all stripes to ratchet up their prices or lose revenue.

While many are resisting adding a dollar or two to the costs of their goods and services, if pump prices continue to trend upward as expected, fewer will be able to avoid passing the buck to consumers. For many, a slight surcharge to account for gas premiums won't curtail their spending habits, but for some, it may mean the difference between ordering-in or cooking at home. Regardless, it's another way in which the high cost of filling up is affecting local and national economies.

Have you noticed an increase in costs attributable to gasoline prices? Sound off in 'Comments.'

[Source: The Daily Breeze; SushiCam.com]