TTAC recently published a Wild Ass Rumor about Buick LaCrosse wiring problems. Jim Federico breached the GM – TTAC wall to quash the suggestion that production vehicles suffered from electrical gremlins. “I can confirm there is NO truth to this RUMOR,” the LaCrosse Vehicle Line Executive/Chief Engineer wrote. So I called the man responsible for “any car on the GM Global Mid-Size platform until I retire or get fired, whatever comes first.” [Note: GM no longer uses Greek names for its platforms. Literally. Federico flat-out refused to identify the Buick’s platform as an “Epsilon.”] Federico told me GM has delivered roughly a thousand LaCrosse to dealers; only one has been marked return to sender. “It was a car with a burned-out starter,” he revealed. “We identified the problem as a defective component and contacted the supplier to rectify the situation.” Now, as for that wiring rumor . . .

I’ve crossed swords with AskPatty.com before. When the self-professed “automotive advice for women” site asked me to link to a contrived story on autos and the fairer sex (here be trolls), I replied that TTAC does not approve of sexual discrimination. The editor thought I was kidding. I wasn’t. I’m philosophically averse to AskPatty’s “Women Buy Cars, Men Have a Penis” perspective. But it’s the site’s craven kow-towing to carmakers that really sticks in my craw. And vice versa. Carmakers never met a PC website they didn’t like; they especially don’t not like this one. Normally, I’d [continue to] flank the issue. But advertisertalk.com reports that Midlands Honda in South Carolina has become the Palmetto State’s first AskPatty.com’s “Certified Female Friendly Location,” complete with an AskPatty-branded Midlands website. An unspecified number of dealer employees completed some [presumably cumulative] 90 hours of on-line training. So the question must be asked: what did they learn/pay for?

As my father would say, another myth exploded. Eddie Alterman brought David E. Davis back to Car and Driver to . . . what? Restore lost street cred? Re-connect with baby boomers who left the buff book in disgust at its fall from Wilkinsonian grace? Who knows. But one thing is for sure: Davis’ latest column is an unconscionable, virtually unreadable sop to Ford, CEO Alan Mulally and the dead-in-the-water Lincoln brand. Davis starts as he means to finish, deploying prose that’s the metaphorical equivalent of Huggy Bear’s wardrobe: “Mr. Mulally has now demonstrated beyond all doubt that he’s the real thing, and his revamped Ford Motor Company, with a terrific portfolio of new products, is rolling proof.” Strip away the Bend Down Low vibe and sure, you could make the case. But it doesn’t take Davis but a brace of paragraphs to stretch both credibility and credulity to the breaking point. “The Lincoln MKT is the latest of several new products that are helping Ford regain lost territory.” Speaking of losing it . . .

Never one to miss a chance to put a left/right slant on, well, anything, today’s New York Times contains an editorial claiming that the Cash for Clunkers (a.k.a. C.A.R.S.) program is a triumph of the Obama administration over Republican naysayers/hypocrites/rat bastards. Blogger Timothy Egan begins by suggesting that C4C is a Republican-style economic stimulus thingie, then excoriates the elephant party for not loving it long time. “They hate it, many of these Republicans, because it’s a huge hit. It’s working as planned, and this cannot stand. America must fail in order for President Obama to fail. Don’t be surprised if the tea party goons now being dispatched to shout down town hall forums on health care start showing up at your car dealers, megaphones in hand.” Incendiary much? I’ll have mine with a side order of sarcasm, please. “But try to give struggling families a one-time boost to buy a more fuel-efficient car, with an amount that wouldn’t pay for paper clips at A.I.G., and it’s . . . outrageous!”

Community Discussion of TTAC's Flaming Policy

Yoga teacher and ForbesAutos refugee Matthew De Paula has brought his zen insights and love of top ten lists to MSN Autos. Given the popularity of the genre (which we now usurp in the name of truth, justice and the American way), Bill Gates’ Boyz must be happy enough with the result—although Matt makes a few choices that will surely give pistonheads pause. We report, you deride. Well, we do too, but I’m sure you catch my drift.

1. Ford Fusion — I’m not saying De Paula is a Detroit apologist, but if ever a qualifier seemed po-faced, well, here it is: “The Ford Fusion doesn’t just hold its own against competitors, it beats them in some ways: The least expensive 4-cylinder Fusion is as fuel efficient on the highway (34 mpg) as the pricier Toyota Camry hybrid.” And that’s it: the only way mentioned. Oh wait. “The updated 2010 Fusion uses higher-quality materials, has better fit and finish, and a quieter ride than the model it replaces.” Don’t you just love it when relative excellence means relative to itself? Me neither.

Very funny, guys. We get it. The Truth About Cars takes you to task for your shoddy “investigative” report into the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s (NHTSA). You respond with an editorial called “ The Truth About Cars and Cellphones.” Inside joke or not, we stand by our condemnation. First, conflating cell phone use with other distractions—excoriating drivers who “juggle hot coffee and a Mc-whatever or attend to personal grooming in the rearview mirror”—is both lazy AND stupid. Second, repeating your dubious charges—that the NHTSA bent to political pressure instead of faithfully discharging its duties—does not make them so. And third, semantics are the second-to-last refuge of a scoundrel. To wit:

Carmakers build cars. The Truth About Cars (TTAC) reviews cars. What’s the problem with that? Any car company that takes account of TTAC’s no-holds-barred reviews is better positioned to appreciate their strengths and learn from their mistakes. To grow, develop, improve, compete and thrive. And yet, the list of automakers that refuse us access to their press cars is, shall we say, comprehensive. As of today, I’m launching a campaign to change that, to get the latest vehicles into the hands of TTAC’s reviewers. Not by altering this website’s call-it-like-we-see-it remit (heaven forfend), but by appealing to the automakers’ sense of honesty, integrity and fair play—and bludgeoning them with our site stats (1m+ unique visits per month, over 2m page views, top Google rankings).

Ever since ForbesAutos.com disappeared down the media rat hole, the autoblogosphere has been more or less listless. Into this breach (dear Horatio) strides everyone’s favorite misnamed bi-weekly motor mag. AutoWeek presents their “best rides for campus cruising.” Which is, of course, the headline writer’s “inventive” take on a top ten list of entirely sensible cars that Mom and Dad should purchase on behalf of their education (i.e. party) seeking progeny. Well, it’s not really a “top ten” list per se—’cause that would mean AW would have to rate the cars in some sort of order, which would risk pissing off the people paying the bills. So here are their random choices for aspiring didacts.

Our good friends at Wooden Horse (a magazine writers’ website) tell us that Lexus is launching a lifestyle magazine called . . . Lexus. Below is the official description of the new buff book. Knowing TTAC’s Best and Brightest as I do, I’m sure you can provide Lexus’ editors with a more appropriate list of departments and articles to entertain and amuse [both of] the marque’s non-narcoleptic owners/enthusiasts.

It is a loyalty and brand-building publication and is mailed for free to anyone who owns or leases a Lexus vehicle. The editorial covers lifestyle, the arts, fine dining and travel, as well as vehicle reviews and test drives of the newest Lexus models. Departments include:

Lexus News – The latest on Lexus’s products, services, owner benefits, and partnerships.
Lexus Sense – Information on timely products and events that will help Lexus owners indulge their senses.
Spotlight – A feature profile on Lexus owners.
LEXicon Culture Pages – A magazine-within-the-magazine dedicated to categories of interest to readers, including Travel, Active Pursuits, Design, Products for Good Living, Cuisine and Philanthropy.
Sensibility – A back-page essay highlighting a notable innovator.

As those who have followed the Porsche-Piech soaps know, there will be an extraordinary meeting of the Porsche supervisory board next week on July 23. On the agenda: “Will we be saved by the Sheik of Qatar, or by the Sheik of Wolfsburg, or all of the above?” Any guesses?

China has become the biggest producer, consumer and exporter of electric vehicles in the world. But China’s people are facing huge problems buying and driving them.

Consumers have a hard enough time keeping all the brands and nameplates in the US market straight; trying to keep track of the myriad suppliers that make up the bulk of the industry is nearly impossible. Even here on TTAC, our well-informed commentariat often throws up its hands at the first sign of supplier coverage. But the fortunes of suppliers to US auto firms have been fading for years now, as Detroit’s misery slides downhill through the various tiers of suppliers. And despite repeated calls for a supplier bailout (and their use as OEM bailout bait), aid has been either misappropriated or rejected. And the bankruptcies show no signs of slowing.

The issue: the optional HID headlights of the circa-2006 Prius are prone to turning off at random times, usually not at the same time. When this happens, they must be turned off, then on again. To fix the problem, Toyota dealers sometimes recommend replacing the entire HID system, at a cost of $1,700. Owners are launching a class action suit to force Toyota to cover these failures out of warranty. “Prius headlamp troubles could dim Toyota brand’s reputation,” writes Jean Halliday in yesterday’s Advertising Age and Automotive News. I’ve suggested that manufacturers pick up the cost of common problems out of warranty. That said, this story seems driven more by a media agenda rather than by the facts.

MediaWeek reports that Detroit’s “troubles” have put the hurt on Car and Driver and Road & Track ad bucks. “With auto advertising down 47.5 percent in print in Q1, per Publishers Information Bureau, the car books could use help. Through July, Car and Driver’s ad pages fell 20.7 percent to 451, per the Mediaweek Monitor (rival pub Automobile was down 34.1 percent, to 289). ‘Things have been paralyzed a little bit with what’s been going on in Detroit,’ [chief brand officer John] Driscoll said.” Understatement much?

All this talk about the Porsche Panamera over the weekend (review to follow, eventually) had me thinking about automotive desirability. I reckon when you get to a certain price point, all rational considerations disappear in a cloud of Franklins. Anyone who buys a car for over $100,000 or so owns at least another two or five or twelve other vehicles. So they’re not bothered about any one car’s resale value or reliability. Vehicle choice is purely a question of taste. The higher up you go in this pistonhead pantheon, the more true this becomes. So, while anyone contemplating this choice of whips could probably buy both, I’m interested to see which way our Best and Brightest falls. If you had to put one of these in your garage, would you opt for the world’s fastest Bug or the gold-plated Big Mac?

Friday Schmooze

A lot has been written about GM’s dysfunctional corporate culture, much of it here. Thanks to the mean meme, GM CEO Fritz Henderson has been forced to add a bizarre explanation of how a consummate GM insider can reform the sclerotic bureaucracy that vomited him forth. Up? Anyway, Fritz has been hard at it, deigning to dignify ex-Car Czar Bob Lutz’ in-house media mouthpiece (FastLane) with his presence. Yes, well, bully for him. But you have to wonder about the CEO’s promise to create a laser-like focus on New GM’s 34 (count ’em 34) nameplates when the company is creating and abandoning websites like a phishing scheme. Anyone remember GMNext?

After the GSA and Nancy Pelosi’s office turned down TTAC’s request for a breakdown of the vehicles purchased under the Recovery Act’s Energy-Efficient Federal Motor Vehicle Fleet Procurement program, we went all FOIA. The U.S. General Services Administration (GSA) has now released the info to us (as it should, transparency for the program is promised here). We’ve published the list after the jump, formatting the data by model, number purchased, country of assembly and fuel economy. Exactly 11,319 of the 17,205 vehicles purchased were assembled in the USA. [NB: I’ve provided fuel economy numbers for base versions with automatic transmissions, as per typical fleet practice.]

Our man Baruth has driven both the re-refreshed Taurus and the new Taurus SHO. I’ve got one word for his report: embargo. And another: Monday. Yes, TTAC now “respects” long-lead product-related embargoes. In other words, if a car maker invites us to test drive a new product, we’ll agree to stay schtum until they decide it’s OK to publish our review. Or the embargo breaks down. Galled as I am at our own collusion, I’m reversing our stance on the buff-book-protecting manufacturer–media conspiracy of silence for two reasons. First, it will have no impact on the content of our reviews. (We will always reveal the manufacturer’s contribution to our reviews.) Second, you WANT us on that junket. You NEED us on that junket.

When the Presidential Task Force on Automobiles (PTFOA) fired GM CEO Rick Wagoner, it should have ended any debate whether or not the Obama Administration was in complete control of the soon-to-be-nationalized American automaker. And yet the president and his minions continue to assert that the PTFOA’s ongoing interventions within GM’s administration jibe with their preposterous proclamations about a “hands-off” non-managment, management approach. Although the PTFOA left themselves a supertanker-sized loophole—we’ll only mess with “macro” decisions about GM’s corporate governance—evidence mounts that the 25-member government quango is, as the Brits would say, well in there mate. The latest proof of life arrives via our good friends at Autoline AfterHours. On John McElroy’s vidcast, GM’s VP of sales, service and marketing for North America offered fresh insight into the joys of federal ownership.

The New York Times reports that Buick is using your hard-earned taxes to try to get you to drive beautiful. The new campaign (also at buick.com) asks you to rethink the damaged brand because “[e]verything you thought about Buick just went boom.” Question: how long before Buick goes “poof”? Anyway, what do you make of the new tagline “Take a look at me now”? According Leo Burnett’s general director for advertising and promotion, Buick’s motto is completely unrelated to the Phil Collins song. Yeah, sure. I believe that. But speaking of guilt by association, did anyone at Buick or Leo Burnett actually listen to the song? Sample: “Ooh take a look at me now, well there’s just an empty space. And you coming back to me is against the odds and that’s what I’ve got to face.” Roger that. Just for fun, full lyrics after the jump.

We’ve been quite vocal in our opinion of “Car of the Year” awards such as those sold handed out every year by Motor Trend. Even worse are those awards bestowed by non-automotive rags where a COTY announcement ranks right up there with their pronouncements of the years trendiest sunglasses or the best place for killer mojitos. Yet, for whatever reason, Esquire has decided the world needs yet another of these useless (to everyone but their advertising department) awards.

This spot (which cribs the Allman Brothers tune that gearheads will recognize as the Top Gear theme) is part of what AdAge describes as the repair chain’s effort to attract customers from closing dealerships. After all, the service department is often where the real money is made at dealerships, and the race to snag shuttered dealerships’ business is on. Automotive News [sub] reports that CarsDirect is even offering free 60-day online listings for any dealership that is going out of business. “We hope this offer helps dealers sell more cars as they work to stay in business and remain fixtures in their communities during the transition,” says CarsDirect VP Ken Potter. Not to mention a little free publicity that comes with the charitable territory. Meanwhile, how are GM and Chrysler shoring up their PR after the nasty dealer shutdown debacle? According to a WaPo analysis, Chrysler is emphasizing product competitivity (huh?) and GM is emphasizing restructuring (why?). So much for putting the best foot forward.

As GM stares down the barrel of bankruptcy—oh wait, they’re already bankrupt. My bad. You see, I was reading Ed Welburn’s rant on GM’s FastLane blog. Eddy’s pissed-off at Gerald Sindell’s “ Open Letter to GM CEO Fritz Henderson,” which says GM’s designs reek of “Older white guys wearing suits to the office in Detroit, except for one woman and one black guy.” As the one black guy in question, Welburn’s on the warpath. Hence my confusion. I mean, with GM in C11 and all, you think the head of design would have something better to do than accuse the media of race baiting—even if it is. Which it isn’t. To steal a line from another legendary zombie, can we talk?

Regular readers will know that we’ve taken Washington Post carmudgeon Warren Brown to task for his shameless Motown cheerleading up to and through the federal bailout. You may have also noticed a huge disconnect between Warren’s blind bailout boosterism and his paper’s entirely skeptical stance on federal intervention in the U.S. automotive industry. In an ironic twist of fate, Warren’s decided to take the WaPo’s latest buyout offer—and do so with all of the grace displayed by his bailout boosting pals in The Motor City. He leaves the paper spilling vitriol all over his colleague’s rejection of Uncle Sam’s “investment” in Government Motors.

USA Toda y is in the thrall of . . . the Ford Escape Hybrid. As is the President of these here United States, who traded his gas-hungry Chrysler 300C for the gas – electric trucklette. No surprise, then, that we’ve heard rumors of shortages. Well, not rumors, exactly. More like an open admission by FoMoCo’s El Presidente del Americas. “We are constrained by the amount of components, including batteries, that the supply base can provide us,” Mark Fields said in December ’08. Same spin again in January ’09, via a Blue Oval Boy on Edmunds. The scuttlebutt: Ford loses money on every Escape Hybrid they sell; so it sells as few as possible. Of course, that doesn’t stop The Glass House Gang from using the vehicle to earn brownie points with the MSM . . .

How many Mercedes owners change their own oil to save a few bucks? The latest “Meet the Volkswagens” TV ad doesn’t just insult Benz owners’— and everyone else’s—intelligence. It’s also racially insensitive. By depicting a white guy with his face blackened with oil, it raises the specter of 19th century minstrel shows. OK, that’s a stretch. But so is VW’s supposition that reminding customers of their over-familiarity with their local dealer’s service department is a good thing. And what does a Microbus sliding out of a nearby garage have to do with anything, Amigo? Wait . . . cue-up the Routan commercial . . .

There’s that Microbus again, with its “Cars” rip-off happy hippy stoner’s voice (as opposed to the Beetle’s Arte Johnson-esque German accent). In this ad, the Routan asks an Odyssey owner if her van has an “autobahn-tuned suspension.” Instead of checking her meds, soccer Mom replies that there’s no autobahn in Japan. True! Nor is there an autobahn in Canada, where Chrysler builds the Routan. Or Lincoln, Alabama, where Honda builds the Odyssey. Or the rest of America, where Odyssey mom lives. To the same point, the day a Routan driver explores the limits of her minivan’s autobahn-tuned suspension is the day I’m parking my Audi.

Needless to say, VW doesn’t have the corner on bad commercials. Suzuki’s “Supercar” ad makes it look like an SX-4—or any other car— can’t traverse a pothole without shifting into 4WD. How about Saturn’s recent campaign, where they attempt to reassure their remaining customers that they’re still the “just plain folks” brand that they were back when they were barbecuing—I mean building cars—in Tennessee? A Saturn salesman warns viewers that there’s a car company out there that’ll take your car away from you if you lose your job. Jeez. How un-American is that?

He’s alluding to the “Hyundai Assurance” program where you can return the car with no impact on your credit rating if you lose your job and can’t make payments. Mr. Saturn makes it sound like Hyundai’ll hunt you down and pry the car from your hands as soon as you’re unemployed. Then Saturn man assures you that his [temporary] employer would never treat you that way. Really? Anyone want to guess what Saturn will do the day after their nine-month grace period on payments expires and you’re still unemployed and not making the payments?

And what happens to Saturn’s “Total Confidence” plan after GM sells the “ReThink” brand to the Chinese or Roger Penske or whomever shows up with cash in hand? Or no one at all? Call me cautious but I wouldn’t feel too confident about Saturn’s ability to back any of their promises at this juncture.

Chrysler’s latest commercials proclaim that the bankrupt company (shhhh!) builds dugouts, lockers, easy chairs, radar systems, TV stations, starting gates, skyscrapers, fish finders, battery chargers, base camps, luxury suites, transporters, mechanical bulls, sanctuaries, viewmasters, security cameras, troop transports, and moving vans. No wonder their sales numbers looks so bad. They’ve been building all these neat things while everyone else is building cars and trucks. But don’t worry, be happy! It’s all backed by the U.S. Government, so buy your whatever-it- is they build with total confidence!

Ford wants you to know they’re still building trucks. BIG trucks. In fact, one commercial highlights their extra-cost tailgate and bedside steps and tells you how much you need them to get in and out of the bed of the F-150. Well, if they’re that important, why aren’t they standard? Or even better, if it’s such a chore to get stuff out of the back, why doesn’t Ford make the F-150 a more manageable size so you can just reach over the side to get what you want, like you could a few years back?

If you’re Chevy, and you can’t match the competition’s feature, you just make fun of it! In a Silverado commercial, Howie Long ridicules an F-150 driver (the usual stereotypical clumsy, balding, overweight schlub they use when they want you to know someone’s less than a “real” man) for using his “man step.” It’s the same sort of “you’re a faggot” put-down used by brain-dead high school football players (not to stereotype or anything) on classmates who can program a computer.

After questioning their competition’s customers’ sexuality, Chevy brags about Silverado’s “unbeatable” five year/100K mile powertrain warranty. But they won’t compare their warranty to the Dodge Ram’s lifetime powertrain warranty. Instead, they just belittle the Ram’s less-than-real-man owner for having a heated steering wheel and a manicure.

One good thing that’s come from the auto industry meltdown: fewer car commercials. Unfortunately, the remaining ones are getting worse, as the automakers grow increasingly desperate for sales. They’ll try anything to attract attention, whether it’s lying, belittling the competition or insulting viewers’ intelligence. Come to think of it, what’s changed?

The folks at Mashable love to measure buzz, twits and general internet exposure, and they’ve come up with a few graphs that show how the automakers are weathering the current unpleasantness. And they show that (by the numbers, anyway) Ford is the most new-media savvy of the American automakers. Which means that on the straightforward (and questionably effective) metrics, Ford comes out on top. Most Twitter followers. Most Twitter updates. Most Youtube video tags. Most Flickr photos. Stop me if you’re getting too excited. But despite the huge numerical advantages that Ford boasts in the YouTwitosphere, the most interesting fact is that Ford is the least-covered automaker in actual news stories but most-covered in blog posts. Which means a lot of Ford’s measurable popularity might be attributable to the lack of bad news about it in the mainstream media. Not taking a bailout probably helped, too. Either way, you can’t help but wonder what the benefit really is of most of this “new marketing.”

Yes, it’s a post about something other than the feds getting the US taxpayer to squeal like a pig to save Chrysler and GM from the uncomfortable lesson that actions have—OMG—consequences. In fact, the closer we get to the Big Kahuna of GM’s C11, the more determined I am to provide car-related posts. After a regrettable hiatus, car reviews, both large and small, are back. “Piston Slap” and “Hammer Time” continue apace (thanks, guys). And I’m bound and determined to get some more product reviews headed your way. In that spirit of “Oh, yeah, life goes on long after the thrill of living is gone,” here’s the inside dope on GT5, via escapistmagazine.com, after le jump. Spock! Damage control! It appears we are not digitally configured for damage, Captain. That’s a relief. Indeed. Bones. Dammit, Jim, I’m a doctor, not a videogame producer. I can’t just add source code like that! The whole game could lock up and crash. Do what you can.

Remember the whole “we do not want to run the automakers” routine? Cue up the laugh track. President Obama’s PTFOA has intervened to halve Chrysler’s ad budget during its taxpayer-funded bankruptcy, reports Automotive News [sub]. Chrysler had requested $134 million for advertising during its alleged nine-week bankruptcy. That request was halved by the PTFOA because that body “believed that it was not feasible to not spend anything on marketing and advertising for fear of eroding the image of the brand,” says Chrysler Chapter 11 consultant, Robert Manzo, in court documents. We knew Chrysler’s DIP budget was being drawn up “in consultation with the Treasury,” but this is the first glimpse of a struggle between Chrysler management and its government paymasters.

We got a few “so what’s” a couple of wild-ass days ago when we whispered that Chrysler would be launching a new ad campaign using government funds earmarked for struggling parts suppliers. But setting aside the supplier screwing (yes, advertisers “supply” Chrysler, and with no production, why worry about components?), this means we will be treated to the launch of yet another New Chrysler. This will mark the second such dawning in just about a year. AdAge (via Automotive News [sub]) confirms the rumor, reporting that the responsible ad firm (BBDO, Detroit) also just happens to be Chrysler’s second-largest unsecured creditor ($58.1 million). And Judge Gonzalez still gets to decide whether the Mad Men will be paid out by the government’s “critical vendor” program. Anyway, the new campaign is being termed “educational,” with Chryco spokesfolks explaining “companies in this kind of situation need to communicate more rather than less.” Because sometimes having the President for a pitchman just isn’t enough.

Dave: “The Volt has a range of forty miles. That’ll get you down the driveway and back.”

Elon: “Yeah.”

Discuss.

Holman Jenkins offers his analysis of the Motown meltdown under the TTAC-usurping title “ The Truth About Cars and Trucks.” According to the Wall Street Journal scribe, we should blame the current domestic auto industry implosion on the United Auto Workers’ (UAW) monopoly on Detroit production. Oh, and the manipulation of federal law to protect same. I think. “For three decades, the Big Three were able to survive precisely because they skimped on quality and features in the money-losing sedans they were required under Congress’s fuel economy rules to build in high-cost UAW factories. In return, Washington compensated them with the hothouse, politically protected opportunity to profit from pickups and SUVs. Doesn’t sound much like what you hear incessantly from your Congressman, about how Detroit’s problems are all due to management ‘incompetence’ in deciding to build ‘gas guzzling’ SUVs, does it?” Uh, it kinda does. And I’d like to see a bit more detail on this assertion, please: “Washington’s latest fuel-economy rules actually reward manufacturers for increasing the size and weight of some vehicles.”

Bloomberg reports that Source Interlink has gone Tango Uniform. You may know Source Interlink as the publisher of Motor Trend, Automobile and [a claimed] 73 other publications. Not to mention [a claimed] 90 websites. Like the formerly octo-branded GM, Source Interlink simply bit off more than it could chew—and then discovered there wasn’t enough to eat. “The company listed debt of $1.9 billion and assets of $2.4 billion . . . US magazine advertising revenue in the first quarter fell 20 percent from a year earlier, according to the Publisher’s Information Bureau, an industry group. US auto sales tumbled 37 percent in March. Source Interlink hasn’t reported a profit since the second quarter of 2007.” This after spending $1.2 billion to buy a package of titles from PrimeMedia in 2007. As for the future . . .

Or so says Automotive News [sub] Executive Editor, Edward Lapham, in a brief aside. According to Lapham, Chrysler is ramping up a major ad campaign (a fact that remains unconfirmed by Chrysler) that steals from the $5 billion supplier bailout fund. “Through its ad agencies,” writes Lapham, “Chrysler is lining up major media that are willing to accept a price cut of 2 percent in exchange for assured payment under the federally funded critical-supplier payment plan.” Because Chrysler wanted to see if its post-bailout supplier relations could possibly be worse. Although to be fair, those two percent savings do add up . . . to about 30 pieces of silver.

It is often said that a man’s home is his castle. The Supreme Court has upheld this rule many times. Police may only search upon probable cause or a warrant from a Judge. When, however, can the police search your car incident to a traffic violation? Just about always, claimed the police. Not so fast, rules the Supreme Court. In a close decision, the nation’s highest court reined back the ability of police to make warrantless searches in auto stop cases. Make no mistake, you are not “home” when you are in your car, no matter how much time you spend there or what you do there. Indeed, you have a greater right to privacy walking down a street.

Loose cannons. Where would TTAC be without them? Now that GM Car Czar Bob Lutz has his bankruptcy-proof pension to think about (no thanks needed for the early heads-up, Bob), the man of Maximum has somehow learned to shut the f up. Bob “Operationally Bankrupt” Nardelli hasn’t said boo to a goose since telling the feds he wasn’t earning any salary for driving Chrysler into the history books. Ford’s Presidente del Americas Mark Fields is flying low, maybe even commercial. The head of the Presidential Task Force on Autos, Steve “Chooch” Rattner, is as taciturn as he is tyrannical. These days, GM’s VP (“Very Profitable”) Mark LaNeve is about as good/bad as it gets. At least until last night, when former Ford CEO Bill Ford played BMOC (big man on campus) at the green love-in known as this year’s Fortune Brainstorm Green conference. The MSM has yet to chronicle the PC hoedown. But according to earth2tech.com (who supplied our headline quote), Former FoMoCo CEO Bill Ford’s mea culpa was mucho maxima.

In general, TTAC does not cover motorsports. But we’re on the ball when it comes to the business of automotive sponsorships for sports of all sorts. We recently reported that Ford—Detroit’s last man standing—is a major sponsor of curling. The wisdom of that choice has become clear, as the the Men’s Curling Final was one of the most exciting ever played. As The Canadian Press reports, “It was a game for the ages. The final game of the Ford World Men’s Curling Championships came down to the last rock in the 10th end to break a 6-6 tie between Canada’s Kevin Martin and David Murdoch of Scotland.” Nail-biting stuff and perhaps symbolic of Ford’s last ditch struggle to stay out of bankruptcy court.