Didn't take long: Chrysler's $2.99 gas guarantee draws critics
If you're trying to conserve fuel, making said fuel cheaper doesn't help the cause. If you're trying to sell cars, making the stuff they run on cheaper might help. But one thing is for certain, not everyone is a fan of Chrysler's new "Let's Refuel America Gas Card." As we calculated this morning, the incentive will likely only save a driver a few hundred bucks a year. As ABG reader Dan pointed out in a comment on the original post, buyers need to give up any other incentives currently available in order to get the gas card, and some of those deals are much bigger than $1,200 (the gas plan is in effect for three years). Automotive News is reporting that the Union of Concerned Scientists has got their own phrase for the plan: a "cynical deal." Here's the kicker, the Union's statement continues:
But a mere 3-mpg boost would yield the same savings over the 15,000 miles per year typically driven in the first three years of ownership. Over the lifetime of a vehicle, such a fuel economy increase would save drivers more than $3,000. It wouldn't stop saving drivers money after just three years.
Still, Suzuki knows a way to attracts potential buyer eyeballs when it sees one, and has announced its own fuel program: buy a new Suzuki before the end of June and get three months of free - totally free - fuel. Of course, if you think $400 a year isn't a good reason to buy a new car, don't bother doing the math on three months of no cost fuel. The automakers are playing on fears of high gas prices and hope you can't, or don't, do the math.
[Source: Automotive News (subs req'd) via Autoblog]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Mark 8:20PM (5/06/2008)
Pff...How is this a good idea? I bet this idea was pitched by Exxon Mobil or shell.
Why do I think this? Well, think about it. "Free" gas or "discounted gas" could distract customers from wanting vehicles that use another source of energy besides oil. This, in turn, will actually *increase* the amount of oil used (if something is discounted or free, we use more), and this will *increase* the price of oil. Anybody who falls for this is a fool for not realizing the real reasons behind this.
There is no such thing as a 'free lunch'. The 'free' or 'discounted' gas will be paid for somehow. And the person who is going to pay for it, is right in the mirror.
Reply
Ryan Morano 9:10PM (5/06/2008)
I guess this all depends on how high gas prices go. By the looks of it, It'll be at 4$ by the summer. And there's no relief in sight. Also, if gas were to go down under 2.99, they did say you aren't forced to use the card. Either way, if someone wants a gas guzzling Jeep, they're going to get a Jeep.
Reply
stevefazek 9:44PM (5/06/2008)
Just a little side note. Our debt to china is 1.7 Trillion dollars the interest varies from when they gave us the money but lets low ball it at 4% thats if we pay it off over 30 years. thats 5.5 billion a month in interest. Oh and a quick side note the Chinese are paying around 2.90 a gallon due to goverment subsidies since they buy oil in USD guess were the money is coming from ;-)
Reply
lagreca 10:10PM (5/06/2008)
It's interesting that nobody ever looks at fuel conservation from the side of traffic flow and stop light inefficiencies.
As a Prius driver, I see the stats on my screen what inefficient stop lights can do to mileage.
Cities and States NEED to work on this!
Reply
Davigan 10:40PM (5/06/2008)
This is such a dumb gimmick - almost makes you wish gas went to $10 per gallon. That would teach Chrysler to focus on the right thing, namely more fuel-efficient cars.
Reply
Chris M 11:25PM (5/06/2008)
It's just like putting up a flashing neon sign saying "Our cars get really lousy gas milage, so we have to bribe you to buy them!"
Reply
Niralisherni 5:45AM (5/07/2008)
If you buy a ZAP EV, you get free electricity for one year!
Reply
whatda 4:01PM (5/07/2008)
Real reason:
This way you can save on minor gas charges but still have massive maintenance on your gas car. Automakers make 30% of their revenues off of maintenance repairs and if you drive a hybrid or even better an EV then there will be literally none of that 30%.
1. Chysler is not solving any problem because it's internal.
2. Avoids making a fuel-efficient car
3. makes people be satisfied with a Gas Car.
And they don't know how to run a real solid business. That's why they are in debt for who knows how long.
Reply
Walter Money 2:27PM (5/08/2008)
While Chysler may not be making more fuel-efficient cars quickly, they are helping the low income people who may purchase a small car while getting a savings on gas. Those who have no choice in how far they commute (30-50 miles) to work daily. This will help them if they decide to purchase a new car.
Reply
Jeff 2:37PM (5/08/2008)
The $1200 savings is not accurate. If gas stays in teh $4 area then most vheicles would have a savings of roughly $2000. If gas goes up to $5 per gallon as is expected then the savings go up to roughly $4000.
Ever check out the lifetime energy footprint of a Prius? Talk about a non-green vehicle....
Reply
njessup 4:11PM (5/12/2008)
You hippies are bashing the idea because it is not "green" enough for you. You believe that the nation has to switch over to green cars with the snap of your fingers. It is not going to happen. The combust ional engine is going no where. And the sky rocketing CO2 is not coming from our country.
Reply
RS 6:18AM (5/09/2008)
The 2009 Chrysler Aspen two-mode HEMI® Hybrid is coming fall 2008. It's a start.
Reply
Brian 3:41PM (5/08/2008)
Chrysler makes the Sprinter. It uses a Mercedes diesel engine. These engines are made in Europe where biodiesel is used. The sign at the fuel cap on the vehicle states that using more than 5% biodiesel will void the warranty. As far as I am concerned they have designed themselves out of the future. From now on we will only buy used sprinters that are out of warranty so we can use the fuel we want. They have one answer in their inventory and refuse to allow it. They deserve to go out of business for their shortsightedness.
Congress raises CAFE standards to 35 MPG sometime in the future. American auto manufactures fought this change hard. Ironically we could be there now today if everyone switched to driving a Honda. They are there already.
American car companies deserve to go out of business for their shortsightedness. This is what happens to a business in America that does not forsee and adjust to the future. This is all part of business eveolution. Now that we have a "global" economy the entire world is kicking their but.
Reply
Dennis 4:22PM (5/08/2008)
First of all Chrysler is producing more fuel efficient vehicles as their hybrids will be released in 2009. They are trying to combat the obvious gas problems and uncontrollable rise in prices. You just cant produce more efficient vehicles overnight. I applaud them for trying to make a difference and help consumers save money at the pump.
Reply
voiceofreason 8:34PM (5/12/2008)
Am I the only one who realizes that this ropes the car buyer into getting a Chrysler-finance credit card?
When the heads of the credit card companies addressed a Congressional panel earlier this spring, they claimed that late fees account for the third largest portion of their revenues. This would indicate that a large percentage of these buyers will end up paying late fees on the gas charged to these cards. This is an incredibly creative (and sneaky) way for Chrysler to establish a lucrative new revenue stream.
In addition late payment fees, Chrysler can add surcharges and penalties for improper card use, fuel type, and mileage overages.
It almost seems predatory. I predict Chrysler will make money with this gimmick - the sin of it all is that it will have nothing to do with looking after people -or- the environment.
Reply
EmmettBlake 4:31PM (5/20/2008)
Let's give Chrysler the benefit of the doubt.
What if this is an infrastructure experiment?
This guarantee is limited to Chrystler approved locations (i.e. Dealerships or Fuel Stations with existing service contracts with Chrisler).
If this is an infrastructure experiment this would prove feasibility of extending existing infrastructure to a new usage. If it works it could show feasibility of using the existing Chrysler infrastructure for supporting new fuel types. If successful they could quickly bring to market new technology/new fuel consumers and overcome the infrastructure problem.
If this is not an infrastructure experiment it is just yet another flashy marketing scheme attempting to decieve the American people into purchasing the same products they are currently rejecting.
Reply
EmmettBlake 3:08AM (5/20/2008)
Let's give Chrysler the benefit doubt.
What if this is a feasibility experiment?
This guarantee is only good at dealerships and fuel stations with existing Chryslter service contracts.
Chrysler is a rather large organization with these types of businesses peppered around the USA. If they were able to repurpose existing infrastructure quickly and efficiently they could bring to market new technology and initially support the refueling needs for new technology vehicles until infrustructure could organically grow around it.
The next question: Is Chrysler ready to lead the migration away from petro fuels?
The next question: Is Chrysler simply trying to pull the wool over our eyes and continue to sell products the American people are yearning to pull away from through marketing smoke and mirrors? Will the locations supporting the price guarantee be sufficient for the consumer to actually make use of it?
Reply
Mike Smith 12:52PM (6/02/2008)
I don't understand why everyone is looking at this in terms of energy, or efficiency, etc. All Chrysler's done here is come up with a creative way to offer $2000 (or so) cash back. Manufacturers give incentives all the time to sell more cars; how is this any different?
Reply