2009 Ford Focus Ses 2.0l Fwd Front Disc/rear Drum Brakes A/c With 65,675 Miles on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Trump wants a trade deal, but South Korea doesn't want US cars

SEOUL - US auto imports from the likes of General Motors and Ford must become more chic, affordable or fuel-efficient to reap the rewards of President Donald Trump's attempts to renegotiate a trade deal with key ally South Korea, officials and industry experts in Seoul say. Meeting South Korean President Moon Jae-in last week in Washington, Trump said the United States would do more to address trade imbalances with South Korea and create "a fair shake" to sell more cars there, the world's 11th largest auto market. "What we really want to say to the United States is: Make good cars, make cars that Korean consumers like." While imports from automakers including Ford, Chrysler and GM more than doubled last year largely thanks to free trade deal which took effect in 2012, sales account for just 1 percent of a market dominated by more affordable models from local giants Hyundai and affiliate Kia. Imports make up just 15 percent of the overall Korean auto market, and are mainly more luxurious models from German automakers BMW and Daimler AG's Mercedes-Benz, which also benefit from a trade deal with the European Union. "Addressing non-tariff barriers would not fundamentally raise the competitiveness of US cars," a senior Korean government official told Reuters, declining to be identified because of the sensitivity of the subject. "What we really want to say to the United States is: Make good cars, make cars that Korean consumers like." TASTE BARRIER In Korea, US imports are seen as lagging German brands in brand image, sophistication and fuel economy, industry experts say. US imports do have a competitive advantage in electric cars: Tesla Motors' electric vehicles are seen as both environmentally friendly and trendy, while GM has launched a long-range Bolt EV. US Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross had cited a quota in the current trade deal as an obstacle to boosting imports. The quota allows US automakers to bring in each year 25,000 vehicles that meet US, not necessarily Korean, safety standards. Should GM, for example, decide to bring in more than its quota of one model - the Impala sedans - it would cost up to $75 million to modify the cars to meet Korean safety standards, the company told its local labor union. Asked about non-tariff barriers, a spokesman at GM's Korean unit said removing them could expand the range of models the company can bring in from the United States. No US company, however, has yet to make full use of the quota, industry data shows.

Ford workers vote to ratify new four-year UAW contract

DETROIT — The United Auto Workers union said on Friday that rank-and-file members at Ford have voted in favor of a new four-year labor contract with the No. 2 U.S. automaker. The UAW will now focus on Fiat Chrysler Automobiles (FCA), the sole remaining Detroit automaker without a new labor contract. Talks with FCA are expected to begin on Monday, a UAW spokesman said. The union said 56.3% of Ford's hourly workers voted to approve the deal, which allowed the company to avoid a strike like the one that cost its larger rival General Motors about $3 billion (GBP2.3 billion). UAW leaders said earlier this month that Ford under the deal agreed to invest more than $6 billion in its U.S. plants, and to create or retain more than 8,500 UAW jobs. The deal also includes pay raises and lump-sum payments over the life of the contract, a pathway to full-time employment for temporary employees and unchanged healthcare coverage. Workers at GM approved a deal in late October that ended a contentious 40-day U.S. strike, the longest automotive labor stoppage since 1970. Detailed terms of the Ford deal — released just a week after GM workers approved their new contract — echoed those agreed to with GM, as the union typically uses the first deal as a template for those that follow. UAW leaders managed contract negotiations with Ford and GM, including the lengthy strike, while struggling with an ongoing federal corruption probe. To date, 10 people have pleaded guilty in connection with the criminal investigation into illegal payoffs. Just last week former UAW vice president and former GM board member Joseph Ashton was charged with conspiracy to commit money laundering and wire fraud. Earlier this month the UAW said that its president, Gary Jones, who had been linked to the ongoing corruption probe, was taking a leave of absence. Rory Gamble, the union's acting head, said last week he will examine every department of the union in response to the spreading federal corruption probe to prevent future misuse of members' dues.

Ford fights back against patent trolls

Some people are just awful. Some organizations are just as awful. And when those people join those organizations, we get stories like this one, where Ford has spent the past several years combatting so-called patent trolls. According to Automotive News, these malicious organizations have filed over a dozen lawsuits against the company since 2012. They work by purchasing patents, only to later accuse companies of misusing intellectual property, despite the fact that the so-called patent assertion companies never actually, you know, do anything with said intellectual property. AN reports that both Hyundai and Toyota have been victimized by these companies, with the former forced to pay $11.5 million to a company called Clear With Computers. Toyota, meanwhile, settled with Paice LLC, over its hybrid tech. The world's largest automaker agreed to pay $5 million, on top of $98 for every hybrid it sold (if the terms of the deal included each of the roughly 1.5 million hybrids Toyota sold since 2000, the company would have owed $147 million). Including the previous couple of examples, AN reports 107 suits were filed against automakers last year alone. But Ford is taking action to prevent further troubles... kind of. The company has signed on with a firm called RPX, in what sounds strangely like a protection racket. Automakers like Ford pay RPX around $1.5 million each year for access to its catalog of patents, which it spent nearly $1 billion building. "We take the protection and licensing of patented innovations very seriously," Ford told AN via email. "And as many smart businesses are doing, we are taking proactive steps to protect against those seeking patent infringement litigation." What are your thoughts on this? Should this patent business be better managed? Is it reasonable that companies purchase patents only to file suit against the companies that build actual products? Have your say in Comments.