While I am confident you are growing tired of the “Toyota Story”, there have been some developments over the last few days that I think are worthy of comment. In numerous publications, and in some of their own public statements, Toyota has indicated that they are tired of being attacked from all sides and they intend to begin “aggressively fighting back”. Their main areas of concern are:

•    Much of the feeding frenzy of negative publicity around Toyota is unfair, and they need to start laying a foundation for why they believe most of the unintended acceleration stories are driver error and not problems with Toyota product performance;

•    Most other OEMs have had similar recall issues and safety concerns, but they have not experienced the same degree of governmental and public scrutiny;

•    Toyota is a very large employer in the United States, and they need to start taking better advantage of this fact.

All of this is true and, in the current environment, none of it matters. Toyota needs to understand that, fair or not, they are the current “Tiger Woods story” and they are going to have to give the media time to get tired of it and move on to the next big subject. Taking an aggressive and highly visible public stance will only prolong the interest. Toyota needs to be very careful to not make a bad situation worse. By way of example, I was interviewed by a major Japanese newspaper after Mr. Toyoda’s congressional testimony, and they asked me if I thought he had helped Toyota’s cause in the U.S. To which I replied, “That was not possible. He was in a lose-lose situation, and the only thing he could hope for was to not make the situation worse.” Nothing has changed. The best thing that could happen to Toyota is for the public scrutiny on this issue to begin to lessen so the company can quietly start rebuilding their image and their brand. If they push back in a way that is viewed as insensitive or arrogant, they could do severe and permanent damage to their sales and brand in the U.S. So, while lashing out at critics may be a cathartic experience for Toyota (and something their lawyers want them to do to set up a legal defense against their growing list of lawsuits), we believe this would be a huge mistake.

read more view less   |   0 comments

As many of you may have seen this weekend, General Motors announced that they are reinstating approximately 660 of the 2000 dealers they planned on cutting as part of their government bailout.  In a good overview of the situation, an article in Saturday’s Wall Street Journal (“GM Reverses Cuts,” WSJ, 3/6/10)[sub]  these dealers are part of the approximately 1100 dealers that appealed their closing to GM when it was first announced last summer.  We think GM did an about face for a number of reasons:

• Many of these dealers were sustainable businesses that could survive long term.  They clearly got caught in a mathematical model that set an arbitrary number of dealer closings as part of GM’s bankruptcy process last summer;
• GM needs more dealers than they have currently to retain, let alone grow sales share in the U.S.  As the article points out, GM CEO Edward Whitacre Jr. has made growing sales in the U.S. a major part of his strategy and it would be very hard for GM to do that with the current reduced set of dealers.
• Many of these dealers are in areas where the competition is not as intense as in highly concentrated suburban regions and GM was basically abdicating sales needlessly.

The one danger in this announcement is that GM loses sight of the main reason they agreed to the drastic downsizing in the first place.  They need to get to a dealer ratio that allows them to compete on something other than price.  If you have multiple dealers selling the same product in a relatively small geographic area, all they do is compete with each other on price.  GM has to get away from this model, particularly for its premium brands like Cadillac.  In addition, as this article pointed out, Toyota has 1,452 dealers with average sales per dealer of 1,219.  GM currently has about 5,500 dealers with an average sales per dealer of 376. That differential puts GM and their dealers at a terrible profit disadvantage to many of their New Domestic competition.  The $64,000 question for GM management is what level of sales per dealer makes sense for GM?  With their much broader mix of rural small town and suburban/metro dealers, an arbitrary goal of matching Toyota doesn’t make a lot of sense.  (Besides, the smart aleck in me believes Toyota is doing a great job reducing their sales per dealer with their current safety nightmare.)  Given the management changes that have happened at GM under Mr. Whitacre’s leadership, we are modestly optimistic that GM will successfully figure this one out.

read more view less   |   0 comments

Now that public companies are reporting their 2009 full-year results, we took a closer look at ten of them, from A to V, to see how they fared. Everyone had a decline in net sales, of course, by percentages ranging from 16% at Goodyear to 44% to wheelmaker Superior Industries. But some are finding silver linings.

Production volume reductions and unfavorable foreign exchange were the curse of 2009 for these large automotive suppliers. The fourth quarter showed a glimmering of hope, though. Seven of the companies saw improvement from Q4 2008. BorgWarner sales were up 29% Q4 YOY. Visteon was up 27%, and TRW up 20%, while Tenneco, Federal-Mogul, Goodyear and Lear were up single digits. American Axle had its second consecutive profitable quarter at the end of 2009. The strengthening of the market is underway, and the rising tide is lifting most boats.

read more view less   |   0 comments

We are always telling our clients to look creatively for ways to take advantage of market trends and create new products around them. Here is an example of a company that is working on doing that. MTC Transformers, a supplier of precision engineered transformers and rewind services, is rechanneling their core expertise in another direction to capitalize on the emerging EV market.

In 2009, MTC Transformers founded a subsidiary company called Evatran, which is developing a hands-free EV charging system known as Plugless Power„·. The system works on the very old principle of inductive power transfer – electrical power flowing into a primary source causes current to flow into a secondary source. Evatran anticipated problems and inconveniences that could be associated with plug-based systems. The Plugless Power system is simple and works based on proximity between the charger and the vehicle. The vehicle itself has to be equipped with a specifically designed adapter, and from there EV drivers simply have to find a Plugless Power equipped parking space and the charging occurs with no further intervention from the driver. According to the company, this method of charging does not take any longer than a traditional plug.

According to the company’s website, field trials for Plugless Power are being carried out during the first quarter of 2010. Evatran expects to reach production capability by late Fall 2010. That target will nicely coincide with the planned introduction of several new EVs like the Nissan Leaf and Chevy Volt, to name a couple. Pricing has not been finalized as of yet. I am curious to see how the market receives this product, since it solves a “problem” that really doesn’t seem like that much of a problem in the first place. Is it really that much of an inconvenience to plug something in?

read more view less   |   0 comments

It’s probably been at least six to nine months since Nissan reorganized their Mexican operations with the intent to make them more focused and bottom-line driven for their small-car segments in North America.  I must admit that IRN’s forecasting team was initially skeptical when we first got word of Nissan’s plans for some of the sub-compact vehicles like the Micra (also known as the March in Asia).  We set the volumes quite low as we didn’t anticipate very many consumers in the US would lap up these ultra-small vehicles.  But we’ve since been educated in the ways of Nissan (or at least we think we have!). 

Nissan has announced it is planning on manufacturing the Micra in Thailand, China, India and Mexico.  It remains to be seen whether the last manufacturing site will be Brazil or England.  Given the cost structure, our bet is that Brazil will be given the odds as the favorite and that Mexico's favorable trade agreements will be used to leverage as much volume as possible for all other nations.

read more view less   |   0 comments

The second Toyota hearing this week, before the House Oversight Committee on Wed. Feb. 24, was similarly unproductive in its effort to address complex issues in a highly simplified public hearing. At least Akio Toyoda’s use of an interpreter slowed the pace and made it slightly more difficult for the committee members to bowl over the witnesses. That said, the only substance at the hearing reiterated the written testimony of Akio Toyoda and Yoshimi Inaba, so reading those will give you the gist of the almost 2.5 hour handling of Panel 2. During the first panel, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood was in the witness seat from 11:10 am to 2:05 pm, and he behaved in a way that only a former congressman could.

In blustery fashion, Secretary LaHood defended his department, said that NHTSA has the necessary expertise, and replied “I’ll get back to you later for the record” any time specificity was required. Unlike the corporate witnesses, he was largely treated with courtesy and deference as a former fellow congressman, and even allowed himself the luxury of sarcasm, as when Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) asked NHTSA to provide data on how effective recalls are in terms of the number of vehicles that actually get brought in to be fixed. “Of course we will, but we are a little busy right now so I hope you’re not going to stipulate [within] 24 hours,” LaHood responded. (News stories that followed the hearing reported that Secretary LaHood repeated his assertion that recalled vehicles are not safe, but his point was more that consumers need to follow through on recall notices and get the repairs made.)

Panel 2 - Toyota Motor Corp. President Akio Toyoda, and President  & COO of Toyota Motor North America Yoshimi Inaba

The two Toyota executives expressed deep regret, and explained that: the company had gotten its traditional priorities of Safety, Quality, and Volume confused; had not done a good enough job of keeping the customers’ perspective at the forefront; and had lacked sufficient communication between regional operations. They outlined organizational measures taken to prevent such problems in the future. Mr. Inaba also described the recent recall measures, noting in his testimony, “In both of these cases, Toyota thoroughly and carefully evaluated the technical aspects of these issues. However, we now understand that we must think more from a customer first perspective rather than a technical perspective in investigating complaints, and that we must communicate faster, better and more effectively with our customers and our regulators.”

Both men reiterated that there has been no indication of problems in the electronic throttle control system. When asked about Dr. Gilbert’s testimony from Tuesday (see Wednesday's post ‘Impressions from the Congressional Hearings’), Mr. Toyoda expressed a willingness to have an open forum to work together and Mr. Inaba said they would be glad to listen to his input, but that it appears it involved cutting into the circuitry and manipulating it.

A sampling of questions from the committee members:

What Did You Know and When Did You Know It?
• When did Toyota first learn it had a problem with unintended acceleration and why did it take almost a year to bring it to the attention of regulators and even longer to report it to the public?
• Did your good reputation make regulators less inquiring or make you less demanding of yourselves?
• How do you say to your customers that they can trust you now when it seems there is no end to the series of promises that come short of reaching the goal of safety?
• [Regarding the presentation from Toyota’s Washington office citing favorable outcomes] This is one of the most embarrassing documents I’ve ever seen. Can you assure the committee that this will not be the approach of the company?
• How did Toyota lose its way? You say the company grew too fast. Some smart lawyer gave you those words.

Clueless Questioners
• Problems were detected sooner in Japan and Europe. Are you giving the American market the same level of attention as the Japanese or European markets?
• If you have one pedal mechanism that is resulting in problems and another that is not, going in the same vehicle, why not put the good pedal in all of them? Why don’t you have the same specifications?

Crazy Expectations of Mid-Hearing Commitments
• The Attorney General of New York announced an agreement with Toyota today that if a customer is afraid to drive his vehicle, the dealer will pick it up, repair it, and reimburse the customer for related charges like taxis. Will you commit to doing this for customers nationwide?
• Dealers are taking care of customers, but what about the families of people who died, will you assume their medical and funeral costs?
• I drive a Camry hybrid. Can you assure me that it will never be recalled, for any reason?
• Do you agree that the government should require all automakers to report total malfunctions, all incidents, no matter where in the world they occur? Yes or no?

At this point, we decided to forego watching the last panel, consisting of advocates and victims, which began at 5:36 pm.

read more view less   |   0 comments

Recent consumer price data released indicates that inflation remains in check – which is a good thing for those of us wanting to purchase a vehicle, right? But not such great news for suppliers and automakers trying to recoup any “extra” costs that inevitably go into putting that vehicle onto the dealer lot. There’s a trend on the near-term horizon that appears likely to throw a steely wrench into the mix as well. 

According to an article in the Wall Street Journal [sub] today, just three miners of iron ore (one of the chief raw materials required to manufacture automotive-quality steel) shipped about 70% of the iron ore in the world in 2008 (those companies being Vale, Rio Tinto and BHP).  The global economic softening in 2009 tempered the steel market (and its related raw materials), which saw some relief from the strong demand of 2007/2008. Renewed growth from up-and-coming nations such as China, Brazil and India will cause tight demand for steel in 2010, though, and soon.  Because the iron ore mines are operating at or above capacity, they have the ability to set their own prices. Traditionally they have set them each April, but starting this year, they are evolving toward a practice of wanting shorter contracts (or “spot buys”), allowing a more market-driven price. 

Sticker shock - - industry experts are estimating anywhere from a 40 to 80% increase in raw materials could be seen in 2010 as annual steel contracts become a thing of the past.  So the next time you see your purchasing manager, you might just want to give him/her a hug… they could be in for a long year.

read more view less   |   1 comments

We are keeping an eye on the hearings taking place this week on Capitol Hill before the House Committee on Energy and Commerce (Tuesday) and the House Oversight Committee (Wednesday). It is an exhausting experience to watch, never mind testifying! A re-cap and some impressions from yesterday:

Tuesday, Feb. 23 –
First hour taken up with 3-5 minute opening statements by members of the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations and selected members of the full committee on Energy and Commerce. Lots of posturing and formalities, little illumination or value. Panel 1 witnesses sworn in at noon.

Eddie and Rhonda Smith testified about her 2006 runaway experience on the highway in a new Lexus ES350 with 2,728 miles on it. A coherent and compelling tale that included her vehicle accelerating to 100 mph while she had both feet on the brake and tried putting the car in every gear, finally leaving it in Reverse, to no effect, until it spontaneously started to slow six miles later. Very unsatisfactory handling of their situation by Lexus and Toyota personnel, and NHTSA. (Toyota's Jim Lentz later said that he was embarrassed to hear all that.)

Sean Kane, Safety Research & Strategies Inc. – Kane is president and founder of a firm that provides research to attorneys, engineers, corporate and government. Obviously skilled in expert testimony and advocacy, as evidenced by his repeated use of key phrases with inflammatory wording. Some House representatives were irritated by his style, and I think it ultimately limited his effectiveness. Rep. Steve Buyer (R-IN) was the most friendly to Toyota throughout the hearing and he eventually went after Kane regarding the payments he gets from attorneys representing Toyota owners.

Dr. David Gilbert, professor, Southern Illinois University Carbondale – Added to the witness list at the last minute, Gilbert drew the most time during the lengthy Q&A (Panel 1 took 2 hours total). His report “Toyota Electronic Throttle Control Investigation” is available at the Safety Research & Strategies Inc. site. His key finding was that he was able to introduce a fault within the electronic system that should have been detected but that did not produce an error code, leading him to conclude that the diagnostic strategy of Toyota’s systems is too wide a window. He was careful to say that this did not prove a cause for sudden unintended acceleration, but showed it was possible that electronics problems are occurring but are not reported.

Rep. Steve Buyer again brought up the issue of payment to Dr. Gilbert by Safety Research & Strategies and suggested that this tainted his study. It was also brought out that Toyota’s outside technical expert firm Exponent had, since receiving Dr. Gilbert’s study the day before, duplicated his tests. It stated that what he had done to introduce the fault was not something that could occur in real world conditions and one of the congressmen characterized it as sabotage. Jim Lentz in his later testimony was very careful not to criticize Gilbert and to express interest in obtaining more information about his tests.

Panel 2 –
Jim Lentz, president of Toyota Motor Sales USA was sworn in at 2:15 and spent about 2.5 hours responding to questions, to the extent that the congresspeople allowed him to. It was a no-win situation – they wouldn’t give him time to look in his notes for answers to factual questions (Rep. John Dingell, MI was the worst) and any time he tried to describe a new measure, the response was, “That’s nice but why didn’t you do it sooner?” Overall, he handled it extremely well, with great sincerity and appropriate humility. Some committee members expressed frustration that Lentz was not able to answer detailed questions on manufacturing and quality issues. The pressure on Toyota’s Japanese officials increased, since it became clear that decision-making on recalls remains in Japan.

Panel 3 –

Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood was sworn in at 4:40 and gave his opening statement before the hearing was recessed until 5:30 so that representatives could go vote. His Q&A session went until 6:54 pm. He is before a different House committee today answering similar questions, with the same bluster and elevated voice volume, although the congresspeople definitely handle him with more deference, since he was formerly one of their own.

 

read more view less   |   0 comments

BYD Auto Co. is another aspiring auto / EV-maker hoping to make a splash in the U.S. electric vehicle market during 2010. The interesting twist is that BYD (Build Your Dreams) is a Chinese company. Their plan to begin selling their electric e6 in California by the end of this year would make them the first company to sell Chinese-built vehicles in the U.S. Even more interesting is the fact that the company does not, as of yet, have an established network of dealers and, as of early January, they were still studying whether or not to enlist U.S. partners to help them sell the vehicles. Their initial strategy is to launch the e6 in a specific region and sell a few hundred units so maybe they can do this without a sophisticated sales network. The late 2010 timeframe is ambitious and sooner than what BYD had originally planned.

The company admits that the price of the battery used in the car is too high, but they are hoping that consumers will be drawn to the e6, regardless, as the economic situation improves or if gas prices begin to rise. The $40,000+ e6 is a five-passenger crossover-ish vehicle which BYD says is capable of traveling 200 miles or more on a single charge. The styling of the vehicle is decidedly bland, and there are concerns of others in the industry that the vehicle is not solidly designed (an unnamed auto exec was quoted as saying it was half-baked). The company also seems to have a bit of a shaky track record regarding the launch and availability of its plug-in hybrid, the F3DM.

So, the later part of 2010 will be really interesting, as we watch to see how many of the EV targets (the e6 included) really make it to market. It will be especially to check back in 2025 to see if BYD has indeed become the world’s largest automaker as it has announced it intends to be. Stranger things could happen…

read more view less   |   0 comments

As we gear up to watch the Congressional hearings on Toyota today and tomorrow, we checked in with our colleague Andy Fein, of Hans-Andreas Fein & Associates Management Consultants in Stuttgart, Germany, to see how the story is playing out in his neighborhood. The difference in perspective is interesting.

The big stories in the US are the political and regulatory scene, as Congress and the Department of Transportation try to get their licks in, and the questions that are being doggedly raised and denied about the possible role of electronics in sudden unintended acceleration. In Europe, coverage of Toyota’s crisis has a different focus, according to Andy.

One angle getting a lot of scrutiny there is the issue of Toyota’s reliance on one pedal supplier, CTS, for its major NA programs. The single-source strategy is being called into question for the vulnerability that it creates for an automaker. That issue has been mentioned in the news here, but only in a minor way, perhaps because of CTS’ insistence that it is a design rather than a manufacturing problem, but more likely because it has been eclipsed by other issues that are much more compelling to the general public.

The other lead story in Germany is the implications for the battle between Volkswagen and Toyota. Volkswagen has stated that it wants to replace Toyota as the world’s largest automaker by 2018. Currently at No. 3 with 6.3 million vehicles sold in 2009, VW thinks 10+ million by 2018 is doable, given its market share in Europe, dominance in China, strong position in Brazil, and expanded footprint in North America. The fact that Toyota appears to be heading in the wrong direction makes this the news of the day in the ongoing Automotive Olympic Games.

read more view less   |   0 comments

Honda recently went out to the financial markets and sold bonds backed by auto-loan payments.  Doesn’t sound so unusual, does it?  Well in the “old days” the answer would be no but in today’s tight and jittery financial situation, finding investors to even consider anything in the automotive world is quite a feat. Here’s why Honda’s bonds are a great sign of things starting to come around (even just a bit)…

Almost all of the bonds were sold OUTSIDE of the Federal Government’s TALF (Term Asset-Backed Securities Loan Facility).  Long name for a program dating back to 2008 that provides federal funds so investors can borrow at very low interest rates.  The program came into existence when the banks literally shut their doors to loaning any money to the investment community which stopped the flow of commerce around the country. 

Without selling bonds (where investors assume some risk in exchange for an agreed-upon profit return) companies can’t invest in new capital equipment to design new cars, build new manufacturing lines, update facilities, etc. When companies go bankrupt, bondholders rarely get paid anything for their original investments - - so the more bankruptcies and negative business growth environment, the more skittish bond buyers (investors) become.

So the fact that Honda could attract enough investors out in the regular market while only relying on the TALF program for a portion of their offering is a darn good sign that people are starting to feel that cars (and car loans) are a solid investment again.  

read more view less   |   0 comments

While the Toyota story has a long way to go before it finally plays out in the media, we have been much more concerned about the broader implications to the consumer’s view of electronics on vehicles. My worst fear has just been confirmed. I live in a small town in Western Michigan and was thoroughly depressed when one of the lead articles in my hometown newspaper was, “Like it or not, tech is taking over your car.” The article started out with a reference to “2001: A Space Odyssey” (never a good sign). For those of you who are under the age of 50, this is a movie where a computer named HAL took over a spacecraft and killed most of the crew. The article went on to talk about the increasing dominance of electronics on vehicles. It referred to the explosion of semiconductor use in vehicles and the fuel economy push that encourages automakers to replace heavy mechanical assemblies with electronic modules. 

Michael Robinet of CSM apparently attempted to convince the reporter that people should not be so upset about this issue, “…what we have seen so far in terms of bringing electronics is just the tip of the iceberg and recent glitches need to be taken in stride.” He went on to say, “There are always going to be some bumps in the road along the way, but the public should bear in mind that it’s just the nature of the beast.  We’re talking about machines that have 3,000 parts working to come together in harmony.” While I know what Mike was trying to say, unfortunately he only reinforced the reporter’s worst fears, i.e. “Gee, that’s comforting… so the chances of Toyota or anyone else actually permanently fixing this problem is zilch.” So how should suppliers and other OEMs address this continuing story?

• Suppliers and OEMs need to start emphasizing the positive performance and safety attributes of the increased use of electronics. Right now, everything is focused on their increased usage as a way to save cost and weight (i.e. cheapen the car). There are many other reasons electronics are being substituted for traditional mechanical assemblies, including improved safety.

• OEMs that are not in the hot seat yet should explain their use of electronics and all of the additional safety features they can bring (e.g. sensors to monitor performance and safety). The consumer is hearing nothing but the negative side of the story at the moment. 

• Suppliers of electronic components and modules should start developing user-friendly ways to describe what their product is doing and not assume the OEM will do a good job of explaining it to the end consumer.

The primary message is that industry participants need to start getting ahead of this story vs. reacting to the latest media report.

read more view less   |   0 comments

Check out our latest column in Automotive Design & Production magazine.

read more view less   |   0 comments

Toyota’s timing of the Prius recall is impeccable for others in the alternative vehicle segment, particularly Nissan, which is building PR momentum for the Leaf. Some interesting developments recently occurred. The three-month Leaf Zero-Emission tour – 63 stops in 24 cities - came to a close last week in New York City and paved the way for the start of the actual sale process. Nissan announced that it will begin taking reservations for the Leaf in April. Unlike some of the other more upscale electric vehicle makers (Fisker, Commuter Cars etc.) Nissan is requiring a $100 deposit that is fully refundable. Interestingly, the final pricing will not be announced until after the reservation process has already begun. It has finally been clarified, however, that the price of the vehicle will include the battery pack – rather than consumers having to purchase or lease them separately as the original plan had been. Actual rollout of the vehicle will begin in selected cities in December 2010. A complete national rollout will take place in 2012.



Another important development for Nissan was the announcement by Hertz that it would begin offering Leaf models (do we call them Leaves?) at some of its rental agencies in the U.S. and Europe starting next year. It is expected that the vehicles will be equipped with fast-charging equipment so that Hertz can ensure optimal availability. Perhaps this will expose more consumers to electric vehicles sooner and help build a loyal following?

The momentum for Leaf is certainly building. If the pricing is right, the Leaf could make things difficult for other companies introducing new EVs – including the Volt. It will be interesting to watch this play out in the market.

read more view less   |   0 comments

We have previously blogged about the seemingly endless opportunities that Ford netted by distancing itself from the Detroit Bankrupt 2.  Who could have imagined that leveraging everything Ford owned with the bank and bondholders vs. the government would have paid off so handsomely (especially with consumers and the public in general)?  But that type of conservative financing has its downside as well. 

One of the continuing problems facing all of the Detroit 3 is the funding obligation for their employee pension funds.  As of the end of 2009, GM’s pension was underfunded by $18 billion, Ford’s shortfall stood at $12 billion and Chrysler’s last reported figure was $3.6 billion as of 12/31/2008.  Additional reporting by GM and Chrysler this spring should give analysts a better idea of how much additional funding those OEMs need to contribute to adequately shore up their pension funds. 

Ford recently reported its pension shortfall had grown in 2009 by an additional $500 million.  The fund averaged a 14% rate of return on its assets in 2009 compared to the S&P 500 average of about 23%.  That discrepancy means that Ford’s fund could continue to face a shortfall due to low interest rates  - - this will cause Ford to increase its contribution to meet funding requirements (unless requirements are relaxed…and that’s NEVER happened before, has it?!).  This is what they call those pesky “legacy costs” that Chrysler and GM just went to court to REDUCE.  It will be interesting to see what Chrysler and GM report about the status of their pension funds later this spring.

read more view less   |   0 comments

Posted by IRN Sales on 12/16/2009 4:20:47 PM

This year's pricing survey report, Industry in Transition: The Dynamics of Supplier-Customer Power, is chock full of new information and insight. The study covers all the core questions on price reduction requests that we have been asking since 1997, but it goes far beyond that in presenting a picture of how commercial relationships and power are changing in the industry. Get your copy for only $250. Click here for an order form. 

read more view less   |   0 comments older posts

Posted by THE AIP TEAM on 3/3/2010

Q1 2010 Forecast - February
IRN's North American monthly forecast update is now available. If you are using the web-based Autofutures Live, the data has already been updated.  If you are using Autofutures Desktop, click the link in the e-mail you received and run the update to get the most current forecast data installed into your program.

IRN's Results Report for January 2010
The North American Industry Results for January 2010 are now available.  Questions, comments? Call us! 616-785-5175.

Sincerely,
IRN's Automotive Intelligence Products Team

Client Login