#DealerNews

Ford Motor Company has benefited immensely from its investments in its Blue Oval Brand, improving sales and profits, while wrapping its entire operations in an aura of invulnerability. But underneath all the Ford-branded success lies a problem that, more often than not, has been conveniently swept under the rug: Ford’s luxury offerings are in chaos. The last time we checked in on Lincoln, Ford was trying to convince dealers that Lincoln’s future product would be competitive in the tough luxury market… without disclosing any details that might give salesmen hope that future Lincolns will be something other than an obviously tarted-up Ford. But as tough a sell as that is, Lincoln’s dealers seem to be even more worried about the more prosaic elements of Ford’s luxury brand turnaround…

The 2011 Model Year will probably not go down as one of the better lineups in the Chrysler brand’s history, consisting of only four models from three nameplates. But, according to Automotive News [sub] it will probably be one of the most exclusive and rarest years for the Chrysler Group, which includes Chrysler, Dodge, Ram and Fiat, as the 2012 model-year will go into production as soon as dealers receive the “one or two buildouts” of 2011 vehicles.

Every state in the union has its own laws regarding a manufacturer’s ability to sell cars, with some states banning the practice outright and others merely preventing OEMs from competing with their own dealer networks. California falls into this latter category, as the California New Motor Vehicle Board bans manufacturers from owning dealerships within ten miles of other same-make independently owned stores. But that apparently did not stop Chrysler from opening a dealership in Los Angeles which, according to a petition filed by the California New Car Dealers Association, is within ten miles of not one, but three independent Chrysler stores.

From the “yeah, that will work” file comes word that Chrysler is pushing dealers to hire more salespeople in order to make its five-year plan goal of increasing US-market sales by 45% this year. Spokesman Peter Grady tells Bloomberg via a leaked memo to dealers

While it’s still early in the calendar year, now is the time to act. Hiring additional personnel in preparation for the spring market is essential for success in 2011.

But aren’t the newly updated Chryslers supposed to sell themselves? Seriously though, the real problem with this plan isn’t simply that it reeks of desperation… it’s that Chrysler is going to have to do more than just increase its number of dealers. After all, isn’t quality as important to a sales force as quantity?

With automakers keeping the incentive pedal pinned to the floor as they entered the new year, a price war has been brewing in the US market for a while now. Hyundai USA CEO John Krafcik has called the trend “a step backward for the industry,” pointing out that nearly every automaker had struggled to regain pricing power coming out of nearly three years of industry-wide weakness. But with GM and Detroit leading the way with high (if “targeted”) incentives, matched by uncharacteristically high incentives from import-brand rivals like Honda and Toyota, it seemed that nothing could prevent a volume-pumping, but profit-sapping price war in the US. At least until Japan was hammered by earthquakes, tsunamis and nuclear accidents. Now, with manufacturers and suppliers still struggling to understand the full impact of production shutdowns and reduced inventories, TrueCar has projected current price trends forward, and finds that supply interruptions could reduce supply to the point where prices actually start coming up again. Check out TrueCar’s spreadsheet on supply and pricing projections in XLS format here, or hit the jump for a few highlights.

The Federal Trade Commission has announced that it will be holding a series of round table discussions aimed at investigating misleading dealer practices in the areas of sales, financing and leasing. According to the Commission’s release, the round tables will

gather information on consumers’ experiences when buying or leasing motor vehicles. The roundtables will explore consumer protection issues related to the sale, financing, and leasing of the consumer vehicles consumers most often use – cars, SUVs, and light trucks.

For many consumers, buying or leasing a car is their most expensive financial transaction aside from owning a home. With prices averaging more than $28,000 for a new vehicle and $14,000 for a used vehicle from a dealer, most consumers seek to lease or finance the purchase of a new or used car. Financing obtained at a dealership may provide benefits for many consumers, such as convenience, special manufacturer-sponsored programs, access to a variety of banks and financial entities, or access to credit otherwise unavailable to a buyer. Dealer-arranged financing, however, can be a complicated, opaque process and could potentially involve unfair or deceptive practices.

The National Auto Dealer’s Association says [via Automotive News [sub]] it will attend the round tables and represent dealers’ efforts to “increase financial literacy” and “promote regulatory compliance.” Auto dealer finance was one of the only finance sectors exempted from the Consumer Financial Protection Act, despite protests from the Pentagon.

The Barcelona Reporter, er, reports that a new law passed by Spain’s parliament

allows dealerships a full refund from manufacturers for unsold cars and, in some cases, to charge carmakers for sales teams’ labour and other related expenses… Car manufacturers will have to repay dealerships for any cars they fail to sell after three months, under the new law.

In the event carmakers’ contracts with distributors expire or are cancelled, they must also pay for layoffs at salesrooms and compensate them for lost custom.

Proponents argue that the law, which was bundled with a number of economic measures, would protect Spain’s 150k dealer jobs which, they argue, exist “at the whim” of manufacturers. Needless to say, the OEMs are not amused, and the association of foreign automakers who build cars in Spain (ANFAC) hints that investments by members like Ford, Nissan and Volkswagen will have to be reconsidered in light of these new rules. And even within Spain, the measure is drawing controversy. Industry minister Miguel Sebastian complains

How will a German, Japonese or French (car manufacturer) understand this law if I do not even understand it myself?

In other “Spain hates cars” news, Auto Motor und Sport reports that the country has also approved a new urban speed limit of 30 km/hour (about 18.6 MPH) in order to reduce pedestrian deaths.

Wards Auto reports that Ford now has more dealerships than Chevrolet “for the first time in years.” Not that this is a sign of growth on Ford’s part… it simply cut fewer dealerships (62) last year than Chevy, which wiped out some 372 at the behest of the government and its consultants. Chevy, meanwhile, has struck back at Ford by offering its version of Ford’s SYNC system… some 3 years after Ford built the only real brand in what is now the crowded field of in-car connectivity options. Of course, Chevy hasn’t released a date or price for MyLink sales, but at this point, what’s the rush? Besides, Ray LaHood is going to really roll up his sleeves and take on the “epidemic” of distracted driving any minute now… right?

Automotive News [sub] reports:

Sixty-four dealerships that were terminated during Chrysler’s 2009 bankruptcy reorganization sued the U.S. Treasury Department today, seeking at least $130 million.

The suit, filed in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims here, alleges the government violated the Constitution by taking the stores’ franchises and their state legal rights without adequate compensation.

Lawyers for the plaintiffs say that more dealers could come on board, as the 64 suing dealers represent only eight percent of Chrysler’s cull. Neither Treasury nor Chrysler (which is not named in the suit) have commented. The suit, which can be read in its entirety in PDF format here, claims violation of Fifth Amendment rights, arguing that:

[the dealer cull] served the public purpose of promoting stability to the financial system of the United States… This is a loss that should not, however, be borne by a few individual dealers but, by reason of its broad and salutary public purpose, must in fairness and justice be borne by the public as a whole.

Automotive News [sub] reports that Global Vehicles, a firm with a contract to distribute Mahindra pickup trucks in the US, has dropped its lawsuit in US court in an apparent attempt to rescue its distribution deal. The contract between Mahindra and GV called for British arbitration of disputes, and apparently the British arbitration panel required that all claims be handled through it rather than in US courts. The dropped suit would have required Mahindra to press forward with its US launch regardless of pending arbitration. Mahindra, meanwhile, has said it is looking outside of its deal with GV for a US distributor, so it’s not clear if GV’s olive branch will even make a difference.

Automotive News [sub] reports that Mercedes-Benz has agreed to take over Smart car distribution in the United States from Group after about three years of operating as a Penske-run distribution channel. Beginning in July, Mercedes will take over all of Smart’s US-based operations because

1. It needs the small-car volume to meet new corporate average fuel economy standards that take effect in the United States in the 2016 model year.

2. Daimler AG integrated Smart into the Mercedes-Benz car unit September. The United States is the only market where Smart and Mercedes operate separately.

But the impact of this deal isn’t limited to ownership and operations, as AN [sub] reports that the four-door car being developed by Nissan for Smart USA has been canceled.

Chrysler’s bailout-era dealer cull has ended up being something of a nightmare, with a number of dealers successfully fighting for reinstatement as federal investigators look into possible criminal wrongdoing. And whereas GM has basically rolled back much of its dealer cull, Chrysler has consistently used arbitrary calculi for closing dealers and has resisted giving dealers the opportunity to reclaim their franchises. Now, the dealers that have won reinstatement in congressionally-mandated arbitration hearings are facing a new threat: relocation. Automotive News [sub] reports that Chrysler’s method of dealing with reinstated dealers is to force them to relocate wherever Chrysler wants them to go. Chrysler has filed a request in a Michigan District Court, asking for the ability to relocate some 20 dealers in 6 Midwestern states, a move it says it must undertake in order to protect its non-culled dealers. But, having picked the winners and losers among its dealers only to see some of them reinstated, shouldn’t these reinstated dealers be afforded the same rights as the dealers who weren’t culled in the first place?