Jump to content
Create New...
  • William Maley
    William Maley

    Suzuki Dealers Are Stuck Between A Rock And A Hard Place

    William Maley

    Staff Writer - CheersandGears.com

    November 13, 2012

    The news of Suzuki automobiles leaving the U.S. has left their dealers with a choice, either take a cash settlement or take Suzuki to court.

    Last week, American Suzuki Motor Corporation was authorized by a U.S. Bankruptcy Court to borrow $45 million dollars as part of a settlement with dealers. The settlement would give dealers a cash settlement, and a new contract giving the dealers the rights to operate as parts and service centers for Suzuki vehicles if the dealers voluntary surrender their agreements with Suzuki.

    There’s two problems with the settlement. For one, the settlements to be paid out, Suzuki will use dealership sales, rent, vehicles in inventory, and investment in facilities to come up with a amount. This arrangement would cause dealers who didn’t sell that many Suzuki vehicles to get a small amount. Also, dealers who agree with the settlement also agree not to take legal action against Suzuki.

    Now, Suzuki dealers can decline the settlement and take the company to court to fight for what they are entitled to thanks to state franchise laws. The franchise laws make Suzuki buyback the dealer’s inventory of new vehicles and parts, and provide compensation for for rent, facility, and other costs.

    There’s a problem with this as well because a dealer’s claim could be just worth pennies on the dollar, especially after Suzuki pays its higher-priority creditors.

    "If Suzuki had chosen to exit the market and terminate the franchise agreements, it would have been subject to state franchise termination assistance provisions such as buying back vehicle inventory, parts, tools and rent on the dealership facility," said James Moors, NADA's director of franchising and state law.

    "NADA would be concerned if Suzuki is attempting to use the bankruptcy process to avoid its obligations to its dealers. NADA is reviewing this proposal and believes that Suzuki dealers should not receive less than what they are entitled to under their franchise agreements and applicable state law," Moors went onto say.

    Source: Automotive News (Subscription Required), 2

    William Maley is a staff writer for Cheers & Gears. He can be reached at [email protected] or you can follow him on twitter at @realmudmonster.

    Related Stories:

    Suzuki Vehicles Bid Adieu, Files Chapter 11

    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments

    I feel bad the the Suzuki guys here in Columbus, thgey were fighting the good fight and trying to make a go of it with like zero support....

    Wonder how cheaply you can buy a Kisashi right now?

    You say Kisashi

    I say Geisundeit

    :P

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    where i wuz at sold a few kizashis for a few ticks under 17 for an AWD S model.

    the loyal suzuki customers came out of the woodwork to snatch up the deals when the prices fell.

    if there is a dealer with a stick shift kizashi, you will get that dirt cheap. probably an S base stick shift for 14 or 15......a GTS stick if you can find one for maybe 17-18.....

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites



    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Subscribe to Cheers & Gears

    Cheers and Gears Logo

    Since 2001 we've brought you real content and honest opinions, not AI-generated stuff with no feeling or opinions influenced by the manufacturers.

    Please consider subscribing. Subscriptions can be as little as $1.75 a month, and a paid subscription drops most ads.*
     

    You can view subscription options here.

    *a very limited number of ads contain special coupon deals for our members and will show

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • FYI - Using this story and my thoughts above, I wrote my House and Senate representatives on this and this is what I sent them:   Hello Suzan, Patty, Maria, Sam Graves, Republican for Montana and head of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee is proposing a $250 annual charge for electric vehicles as part of an effort to shore up funding for the national highway system and other transportation projects. Graves stated that with the increase in electric, hybrid and just overall efficiency in internal combustion automobiles that the federal tax collected per mile traveled has dropped, making it a challenge to keep the Federal Highway Administration funded. With the new fees, Republicans hope to raise $50 billion in new funding over the next 10 years. The additional money would go to pay for highway repairs and additional funding for air traffic control. Republicans point out that since 2008, more than $275 billion has been shifted from the general fund to pay for road repairs.  The federal government has not raised fuel taxes, currently 18.3 cents per gallon, since October of 1993. The latest proposed fee schedule would be $250 per electric vehicle per year and $100 per hybrid-vehicle per year. An earlier proposal had the electric vehicle fee at $200 per year and also included a $20 per year fee for gasoline and diesel-powered vehicles.  The Federal fee would be on top of any state fees imposed. Many states have adopted EV fees to replace the loss in gas tax revenue at the local level. The federal fees are tied to inflation and would be recalculated each year and grow over time. The U.S. Energy Information Administration has pointed out that the proposed $250 fee would require the average EV owner to pay the equivalent 1366 gallons gas tax while hybrid owners would pay roughly the equivalent of 547 gallons of fuel tax on top of paying 18.3 cents at the pump. For an EV owner, they would be paying as much tax as someone driving 15,000 miles per year in an 11 mpg vehicle. The average amount of gas used by non-hybrid gasoline vehicles is roughly 489 gallons per year. I do not mind paying an equal share for my EV on the roads. Yet if they are going to charge me $250 then it is time to raise the gas tax equal to what Hybrid and EVs must pay. ICE = 489 gallons of gas X .183 cents per gallon = $89.49 cents per year based on the Governments only numbers. If they are to charge EVs $250, then they need to raise the Federal gas tax to .511 cents per gallon for equality and tie it into inflation so that gas tax goes up just as the Hybrid / EV tax goes up. With having to pull from the General fund $275 Billion to support the Federal Highway Administration, I find it a little odd that the estimated $50 Billion over 10 years really would make a difference compared to increasing the Federal Gas tax having everyone share in the responsibility to fund our inner state highway system. I look forward to hearing from you, Sincerely, G. David Felt   FYI 2024 according to statista.com, 134.55 billion gallons of gas were sold for the year. At .183 cents federal gas tax, that was $24,622,650,000 billion dollars collected in gas tax. At .511 center federal gas tax, that would have been $68,755,050,000 Billion collected in gas tax in addition to the Hybrid and EV fee that would be collected for our inner-state highway system.  
    • That is so true, all the shopping malls here have major charging areas that are free to the shoppers, but then pretty much anyone can pull in and plug in for an L2 charge. Most city government locations around here have free L2 chargers and Shell has many Volta free L2 charging at various tourist spots around Washington. Major work campuses have free L2 charging like Microsoft, Amazon, Google, Boeing, Paccar, to name just a few.  Fast charging locations are growing as Tesla has signed with the Kroger / QFC / Fred Meyers locations for major charging stations and EVgo / ChargePoint / Electrify America have signed on with Walmart / Safeway / Albertson for stations in their parking lots. Costco has signed on with a private Seattle company to install fast chargers for a fee on their lots. So lots of changes coming for sure. Be interesting to see when the Auto Industry start up gets more places open other than the first one they did on the East coast.
    • One, EVERYONE needs to write their House and Senate representatives on this and make sure they are aware of this very imbalanced approach to funding a government department. With that said, I do not mind paying an equal share for my EV on the roads. Yet if they are going to charge me $250 then it is time to raise the gas tax equal to what Hybrid and EVs must pay. ICE = 489 gallons of gas X .183 cents per gallon = $89.49 cents per year based on the Governments only numbers. If they are to charge EVs $250, then they need to raise the Federal gas tax to .511 cents per gallon for equality.
    • I could see maybe if they add a $250 federal tax on all new car purchases as a 1 time fee.  But to charge it every year is both a ripoff and unfair.  Fast forward 20 years and 90% of cars might be EV, so the fund roads through gas tax will be totally obsolete.  And it will be a tax more so on lower income and working people.  And the gas tax basically works that the college student driving a 10 year old Corolla because that is what they can afford, will pay the same road tax as a pro football player in an Escalade.  
    • @smk4565with all the good points lately! I also think that $50b over 10 years in new funding isn’t enough to cover the deficit the Highway dept is facing. If they’ve had to do $275b over 18 years, the math doesn’t add up.
  • Who's Online (See full list)

    • There are no registered users currently online
  • My Clubs

×
×
  • Create New...

Hey there, we noticed you're using an ad-blocker. We're a small site that is supported by ads or subscriptions. We rely on these to pay for server costs and vehicle reviews.  Please consider whitelisting us in your ad-blocker, or if you really like what you see, you can pick up one of our subscriptions for just $1.75 a month or $15 a year. It may not seem like a lot, but it goes a long way to help support real, honest content, that isn't generated by an AI bot.

See you out there.

Drew
Editor-in-Chief

Write what you are looking for and press enter or click the search icon to begin your search