| Author |
Message |
 |
|
|
 |
|
Advert
|
Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
- No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
- Times and dates in your local timezone.
- Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
- Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
- Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now. |
|
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2009/10/29 16:04:46
Subject: Edmunds analysis: cash for clunkers cost $24,000 per car
|
 |
5th God of Chaos! (Yea'rly!)
The Great State of Texas
|
http://money.cnn.com/2009/10/28/autos/clunkers_analysis/index.htm
Mmmm...governemnt efficiency
Clunkers: Taxpayers paid $24,000 per car
Auto sales analysts at Edmunds.com say the pricey program resulted in relatively few additional car sales.
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- A total of 690,000 new vehicles were sold under the Cash for Clunkers program last summer, but only 125,000 of those were vehicles that would not have been sold anyway, according to an analysis released Wednesday by the automotive Web site Edmunds.com.
Still, auto sales contributed heavily to the economy's expansion in the third quarter, adding 1.7 percentage points to the nation's gross domestic product growth.
Is the economy really getting better?
The Cash for Clunkers program gave car buyers rebates of up to $4,500 if they traded in less fuel-efficient vehicles for new vehicles that met certain fuel economy requirements. A total of $3 billion was allotted for those rebates.
The average rebate was $4,000. But the overwhelming majority of sales would have taken place anyway at some time in the last half of 2009, according to Edmunds.com. That means the government ended up spending about $24,000 each for those 125,000 additional vehicle sales.
"It is unfortunate that Edmunds.com has had nothing but negative things to say about a wildly successful program that sold nearly 250,000 cars in its first four days alone," said Bill Adams, spokesman for the Department of Transportation. "There can be no doubt that CARS drummed up more business for car dealers at a time when they needed help the most."
In order to determine whether these sales would have happened anyway, Edmunds.com analysts looked at sales of luxury cars and other vehicles not included under the Clunkers program.
Using traditional relationships between sales volumes of those vehicles and the types of vehicles sold under Cash for Clunkers, Edmunds.com projected what sales would normally have been during the Cash for Clunkers period and in the weeks after.
Edmunds.com's estimate of the ultimate sales increase generally matches what industry experts had thought, said George Pipas, a sales analyst with Ford Motor Co (F, Fortune 500). But that misses the point, he said.
"The whole purpose of the program was to provide some kind of catalyst to kick-start the economy," he said, "and by all accounts the extra production that was added this year was a boost to the economy."
0:00 /4:57Why I fired GM's CEO
Ford was one of the biggest proponents of the Cash for Clunkers program and several Ford models were among the top sellers under the program.
While auto sales in September were hurt because auto dealership inventories were drained of products by the program, sales this month are already back on track or better, Pipas said. "I think the October sales results will show Clunkers is behind us and there's no more payback or inventories issues."
Emunds.com's projection indicates that, without Cash for Clunkers, October's sales increase would be even higher.
|
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2009/10/29 17:26:19
Subject: Edmunds analysis: cash for clunkers cost $24,000 per car
|
 |
[MOD]
Anti-piracy Officer
Somewhere in south-central England.
|
The report assumes the Edmund's analysis is correct.
However it almost certainly wasn't.
As a pump priming measure, Cash for Clunkers makes more sense than paying unemployed men to bury bottles full of fivers and paying other men to dig them up.
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2009/10/29 17:43:53
Subject: Edmunds analysis: cash for clunkers cost $24,000 per car
|
 |
Dwarf High King with New Book of Grudges
United States
|
Personally, I have a question about:
Using traditional relationships between sales volumes of those vehicles and the types of vehicles sold under Cash for Clunkers, Edmunds.com projected what sales would normally have been during the Cash for Clunkers period and in the weeks after.
Is traditional a term that refers to automotive sales across only economically prosperous periods, all economic periods over X number of years, or only economically difficult periods?
|
Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh. |
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2009/10/29 22:29:17
Subject: Edmunds analysis: cash for clunkers cost $24,000 per car
|
 |
[MOD]
Anti-piracy Officer
Somewhere in south-central England.
|
Therein lies the rub. Automatically Appended Next Post: One factor being that Americans have suddenly switched preference towards fuel-efficient vehicles, which are in low supply.
|
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2009/10/29 22:31:01
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2009/10/30 01:56:27
Subject: Edmunds analysis: cash for clunkers cost $24,000 per car
|
 |
Bane Knight
Washington DC metro area.
|
Kilkrazy wrote:...As a pump priming measure...
SCORE!! Someone else who looks at this with an eye to history rather than "Herp derp derp Political Party"
If we look at all this outlandishness as pump priming there is the chance that our government was actually doing something good.
that article wrote:Edmunds.com's estimate of the ultimate sales increase generally matches what industry experts had thought, said George Pipas, a sales analyst with Ford Motor Co (F, Fortune 500). But that misses the point, he said.
"The whole purpose of the program was to provide some kind of catalyst to kick-start the economy," he said, "and by all accounts the extra production that was added this year was a boost to the economy."
I blame missing this all on our American Public School system.
|
Special unique snowflake of unique specialness (+1/+3versus werewolves)
Alternatively I'm a magical internet fairy.
Pho indignation *IS* the tastiest form of angry!
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2009/10/30 02:10:38
Subject: Edmunds analysis: cash for clunkers cost $24,000 per car
|
 |
[DCM]
.. .-.. .-.. ..- -- .. -. .- - ..
|
We got a US TV report here in Oz yesterday about the electric car tax refund. $6000-$7500 per electric vehicle.
So people in Florida reetirement area started buying new golf carts (base models) for $4000, pocketing $2000 and then selling the golf cart at a loss, because they already have $2000.
So the government made a stipulation that they have to be registered to drive on the road (base models can't), but for $6000 you can buy one that can, pocket $6500 and having made $500 from the government, recharge your cart on mains power at the retirement home (at no cost to you) and drive slowly on the roads, annoying regular car drivers.
Remember America that is your tax dollar at work!
|
2025: Games Played:21/Models Bought:299/Sold:294/Painted:199
2024: Games Played:8/Models Bought:393/Sold:519/Painted: 207
2023: Games Played:0/Models Bought:287/Sold:0/Painted: 203
2020-2022: Games Played:42/Models Bought:1271/Sold:631/Painted:442
2012-19: Games Played:781/Models Bought: 1935/Sold:1108/Painted:704 |
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2009/10/30 03:18:26
Subject: Edmunds analysis: cash for clunkers cost $24,000 per car
|
 |
Bane Knight
Washington DC metro area.
|
Possibly because the most interesting thing from Australia is The Wiggles? Arguably the best export too...
Harden up Bruce, since you're paying 75,000 a day for the Oceanic Viking and watching the American economy and hoping it drags yours up with it.
|
Special unique snowflake of unique specialness (+1/+3versus werewolves)
Alternatively I'm a magical internet fairy.
Pho indignation *IS* the tastiest form of angry!
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2009/10/30 11:23:10
Subject: Re:Edmunds analysis: cash for clunkers cost $24,000 per car
|
 |
5th God of Chaos! (Yea'rly!)
The Great State of Texas
|
http://www.businessinsider.com/the-white-house-stupidly-goes-to-war-with-car-website-edmundscom-2009-10
The White House Stupidly Goes To War With Car Website Edmunds.com
Joe Weisenthal|Oct. 29, 2009, 6:47 PM | 13,823 |37
PrintTags: Cars, Barack Obama
It is an odd, and we'd say regrettable, pattern of this White House that it lets itself get dragged down into fights with specific media outlets.
George W. Bush experienced acrimony with the New York Times, but for the most part, other than general frustrations of a conservative administration, complaining about a liberal media, it was no big deal.
But in addition to Fox News, now The White House is going after highly-respected and influential car site Edmunds.com.
They're actually using The White House blog to dispute the site's analysis of Cash-For-Clunkers (via Detroit News).
The post is snarkily titled: "Busy Covering Car Sales on Mars, Edmunds.com Gets It Wrong (Again) on Cash for Clunkers"
Harsh!
Here's the full post:
-----
On the same day that we found out that motor vehicle output added 1.7% to economic growth in the third quarter – the largest contribution to quarterly growth in over a decade – Edmunds.com has released a faulty analysis suggesting that the Cash for Clunkers program had no meaningful impact on our economy or on overall auto sales. This is the latest of several critical “analyses” of the Cash for Clunkers program from Edmunds.com, which appear designed to grab headlines and get coverage on cable TV. Like many of their previous attempts, this latest claim doesn’t withstand even basic scrutiny.
The Edmunds analysis is based on two implausible assumptions:
1. The Edmunds’ analysis rests on the assumption that the market for cars that didn’t qualify for Cash for Clunkers was completely unaffected by this program.
In other words, all the other cars were being sold on Mars, while the rest of the country was caught up in the excitement of the Cash for Clunkers program. This analysis ignores not only the price impacts that a program like Cash for Clunkers has on the rest of the vehicle market, but the reports from across the country that people were drawn into dealerships by the Cash for Clunkers program and ended up buying cars even though their old car was not eligible for the program.
This faulty assumption leads Edmunds to a conclusion that is at odds with many independent analyses: Edmunds assumption that more than 80% of the payback from Cash for Clunkers would occur in 2009 isn't how many mainstream analyses, including Moody's and IHS Global Insight approach the problem (see pages 5 and 15 of this CEA report [PDF]). In fact, Deutsche Bank recently concluded that “The important takeaway from recent sales trends is that it suggests that there has been minimal 'payback' for the U.S. government’s 'cash for clunkers' program.”
2. Edmunds also ignores the beneficial impact that the program will have on 4th Quarter GDP because automakers have ramped up their production to rebuild their depleted inventories.
Major automakers including GM, Ford, Honda and Chrysler all increased their production through the end of the year as a result of this program, which will help boost growth beyond the third quarter. The actions of private market participants, who would not increase production if they didn’t think demand for their product would be there through the end of the year, is a far better indicator of market dynamics – and one that Edmunds.com conveniently ignores.
Most importantly, this program is helping boost our economy and create jobs now when we need it most. In a comprehensive report, the Council of Economic Advisers estimated that the Cash for Clunkers will create 70,000 jobs in the second half of 2009. The strength of recent auto sales data suggest that, if anything, this projection underestimates the actual impact of the program. CEA’s analysis is transparent and comprehensive, laying out all of its assumptions for the public to understand. Edmunds.com, on the other hand, is promoting a bombastic press release without any public access to their underlying analysis.
So put on your space suit and compare the two approaches yourself:
Edmunds.com
Council of Economic Advisors
Seriously, what's the point of this? Clunkers is over. It just makes The White House look thin-skinned, though it's great publicity for Edmunds. And yes, Clunkers massively distorted this morning's GDP number, as we demonstrated here, but we're with Edmunds that it was a giant waste with little long-term benefit.
|
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2009/10/30 14:34:48
Subject: Edmunds analysis: cash for clunkers cost $24,000 per car
|
 |
[MOD]
Anti-piracy Officer
Somewhere in south-central England.
|
The modern age of democracy includes blogs and twittering as allegedly serious political communication channels -- perhaps it makes a lot of sense to 'engage with the public' using those forms of media.
Attacking a supposedly serious piece of statistical analysis through a blog might work or might not.
I would like to think the White House had done a bunch of stats using historical time series data to prove their point, then rip Edmunds a new one and back it up with a proper paper, but I suspect both sides are pretty much making it up to suit their own slant.
Modern political discourse often amounts to getting the quickest, snappiest, earliest or most recent soundbite 'factoid' into voters' minds. No-one really goes and checks the statistics.
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2009/10/30 14:37:14
Subject: Edmunds analysis: cash for clunkers cost $24,000 per car
|
 |
5th God of Chaos! (Yea'rly!)
The Great State of Texas
|
I'd agree but Edmunds is not a political animal and not in that business. Its a car site for reviewing cars/prices/options (mui excellente for looking at buying a car).
|
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2009/10/30 14:41:24
Subject: Edmunds analysis: cash for clunkers cost $24,000 per car
|
 |
Wing Commander
The home of the Alamo, TX
|
Frazzled wrote:I'd agree but Edmunds is not a political animal and not in that business. Its a car site for reviewing cars/prices/options (mui excellente for looking at buying a car).
Edmunds was definitely being a 'political animal' with that article you listed in the OP even if we give them the benefit of the doubt that its indirectly. Looks like they went out of their league and I've got no problems with the White House trying to clean up the mess they started; Edmunds after all is a very popular and relatively respectable website.
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2009/10/30 14:44:21
Subject: Edmunds analysis: cash for clunkers cost $24,000 per car
|
 |
Incorporating Wet-Blending
|
Kilkrazy wrote:
Modern political discourse often amounts to getting the quickest, snappiest, earliest or most recent soundbite 'factoid' into voters' minds. No-one really goes and checks the statistics.
This may be because it's patently impossible for the average joe to confirm or deny said statistics. The data usually isn't available to public scrutiny, or if it is, the layperson doesn't know anything about statistical analysis, and can't interpret what's going on.
|
Mannahnin wrote:A lot of folks online (and in emails in other parts of life) use pretty mangled English. The idea is that it takes extra effort and time to write properly, and they’d rather save the time. If you can still be understood, what’s the harm? While most of the time a sloppy post CAN be understood, the use of proper grammar, punctuation, and spelling is generally seen as respectable and desirable on most forums. It demonstrates an effort made to be understood, and to make your post an easy and pleasant read. By making this effort, you can often elicit more positive responses from the community, and instantly mark yourself as someone worth talking to.
insaniak wrote: Every time someone threatens violence over the internet as a result of someone's hypothetical actions at the gaming table, the earth shakes infinitisemally in its orbit as millions of eyeballs behind millions of monitors all roll simultaneously.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2009/10/30 14:46:26
Subject: Edmunds analysis: cash for clunkers cost $24,000 per car
|
 |
Rogue Daemonhunter fueled by Chaos
|
Frazzled wrote:I'd agree but Edmunds is not a political animal and not in that business. Its a car site for reviewing cars/prices/options (mui excellente for looking at buying a car).
When you start talking about governmental policies, and their success or failure, you become political.
I'm not refuting their study, but I'd like to know more about how their linking the sales of luxury models to the fuel effecient ones.
Based solely on anecdotal evidence, it seems to me that the program only helped those people who were thinking about buying a car, and could cash in. Basically, it took sales that they would have made during the program and in the next six months, and accelerated them.
It was, essentially, a short term loan to automakers and a subsidy to middle class folks. Not the worst use of governmental dollars, but probably not the best.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2009/10/30 14:48:57
Subject: Edmunds analysis: cash for clunkers cost $24,000 per car
|
 |
5th God of Chaos! (Yea'rly!)
The Great State of Texas
|
Polonius wrote:Frazzled wrote:I'd agree but Edmunds is not a political animal and not in that business. Its a car site for reviewing cars/prices/options (mui excellente for looking at buying a car).
When you start talking about governmental policies, and their success or failure, you become political.
I'm not refuting their study, but I'd like to know more about how their linking the sales of luxury models to the fuel effecient ones.
Based solely on anecdotal evidence, it seems to me that the program only helped those people who were thinking about buying a car, and could cash in. Basically, it took sales that they would have made during the program and in the next six months, and accelerated them.
That was their argument. Being a boon to middle class, I'd disagree as the middle class now gets to pay that $24M. We all pay so a few losers could trade in their craptacular SUVs for a new car. They bought the SUV's they should be stuck with them. Now I have to pay so they could get a new car. Thanks lots.
|
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2009/10/30 14:55:46
Subject: Edmunds analysis: cash for clunkers cost $24,000 per car
|
 |
[MOD]
Anti-piracy Officer
Somewhere in south-central England.
|
Lordhat wrote:Kilkrazy wrote:
Modern political discourse often amounts to getting the quickest, snappiest, earliest or most recent soundbite 'factoid' into voters' minds. No-one really goes and checks the statistics.
This may be because it's patently impossible for the average joe to confirm or deny said statistics. The data usually isn't available to public scrutiny, or if it is, the layperson doesn't know anything about statistical analysis, and can't interpret what's going on.
Anyone can learn enough to be properly suspicious about stats by reading this
http://www.amazon.co.uk/How-Lie-Statistics-Penguin-Business/dp/0140136290/ref=sr_1_8?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1256914150&sr=8-8
And the more scientific minded can follow up with this one:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Bad-Science-Ben-Goldacre/dp/000728487X/ref=pd_bxgy_b_text_b
They are both great books which explain statistics and scientific trials in a way which is easily comprehended by the layman. It won't teach you stats, but it will teach you how to criticise someone else's stats, which is what a member of the general public needs to do.
Much of the data is easily accessible to the public. Oodles of US government data are published for free on the web, so are all major company accounts because they have to be by law. Legal and scientific papers usually require a subscription to a database, but that's is available free to many thousands of members of universities. All these statistics are hardly kept state secret.
If people and newspapers don't avail themselves of this kind of information, it is not because it is hard to get hold of.
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
|
|