Posted by
wholesale on Wednesday, September 16, 2009 10:20:35 PM
This summer's "Cash for Clunkers" instant rebate program was such a rousing victory for automakers that it is now spawning spin-off programs. Call this latest program "Rebates for Refrigerators," with the clear difference being consumers won't have to lug in their old Maytags to score a discount on a sleek new energy-efficient model.
"Cash for Clunkers was a huge success. It cleared inventories; it got people working; it monetized the $3 billion taxpayer bill by having individuals take money from their savings to
inflatable buy a car," says Jeff Rubin, the head of research at Birinyi Associates. "My view on appliances' Cash for Clunkers: I think it is a great idea."
While it might be a great idea, the new appliance rebate program is not proving to be made of the same clunker material. The main difference between the rebate programs is that the clunkers program was federal, while the appliances rebate is not. Instead, the government earmarked $300 million for states to give out as rebates for energy-efficient household appliances.
The clunkers program had a large advertising element, as automakers aired identical ads across the country. Since the appliance rebate program will vary state by state, it could lack a similar cohesive marketing strategy from companies like General Electric ( GE - news - people ), Whirlpool ( WHR - news - people ) and LG Electronics, says Whitney Stanco, energy policy analyst for Concept Capital's ( CTCY.OB - news - people ) Washington Research Group.
Follow Intelligent Investing On Twitter.
Sign Up For The Daily Intelligent Investing Newsletter.
Rubin is so short sighted, it is scary this guy is actually paid attention to
inflatable bouncer . He says that cash for clunkers worked because it caused people to use their savings (i.e. go further into debt) thereby....
Read All Comments (8)
Comment On This Story
The initial Cash for Clunkers program not only got people to drive new autos--it also helped drive automaker share prices. Ford Motor ( F - news - people ) is up 227.2% year-to-date, while Honda Motor ( HMC - news - people ) is up 46.9% and
inflatable castles Toyota ( TM - news - people ) is up 26.9%. The Standard & Poor's 500 rose 14.4% in that time. August car sales were the highest they'd been in all of 2009, a success generally credited to the program.
By contrast, the lack of nationwide coordination may make it harder for appliance makers to get the word out, says Stanco. "It makes a difference in the level of awareness. If the program is going to be different across all 50 states, it will be harder for companies to have an ad campaign," he says. "There's a difference here, and it will make it harder for companies to market." With the possibility of more than 50 different rebate programs, the complexity of bureaucratic red tape is inevitable, along with a lag time for the funding in consumer hands.
States wanting to participate had to send letters to the
inflatable funland Department of Energy by Aug. 15. From there, the federal government began the task of allotting money to states, which is estimated at $1 per person, per state (with a minimum of $100,000 awarded to small states and territories).
Rebates for consumers will also ring up to a significantly lower amount than the Cash for Clunker's flat rate of $4,500. The Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers estimate that customers will receive between $50 to $200 for purchasing eligible energy-efficient appliances like freezers, washers and central air conditioners. In general, the funds for the program will start hitting the economy in late 2009 to early 2010.
Investors should take note, though, that it won't be just appliance companies standing to benefit from embracing the government's green energy-star program. Companies like Honeywell ( HON - news - people ) and Johnson Controls ( JCI - news - people ) will be able to
inflatable tunnels benefit from stimulus programs that have been promised, but not begun, says Stanco. Those programs include $5 billion for the weatherization of low- to mid-income homes and $2.4 billion in funding to support battery manufacturers and next generation electric vehicles.
Still, what good are energy-efficient appliances if consumers have no place to put them? Raymond James financial adviser Randy Carver said that new incentives should be directed toward a loan program for people with good credit scores to buy foreclosed properties. Instead of giving money away, the government could earn interest from the loans. Perhaps the new home buyers would even consider remodeling the kitchen.
Cash for Toasters?
Forbes: What are the implications for the upcoming $300 million Cash for
inflatable sports Clunkers-type federal program to boost sales of energy efficient appliance?
Jeff Rubin: The first-time home-buyers credit has also been a success, but should be extended for investment properties, this would help unclog much of the inventory being created by foreclosures.
I think what we learned from the Cash for Clunkers cars program is that it will run out of money quickly, and it will have to be expanded. That despite the naysayers there is pent-up demand and the new "normal" perhaps will not happen.
The Cash for Clunkers type of stimulus plans are the type that should have been used all along, instead of sending everyone $500, which most just saved, these types of programs force people to spend, that is the entire point of a stimulus plan.
Forbes: Jeff, can you explain to
inflatable tent me a little more how the investment properties aspect of this can/should work?
Rubin: I am not thinking of anything complicated, just extending the tax credit of $8,000, which is now available to first-time home-buyers to houses that are not used for a primary residence regardless of whether that person has bought a house previously.
Randy Carver: Instead of focusing on people who are facing foreclosure due to non-payment, the government should create a loan program for credit-worthy people to buy these properties, people who cannot afford to own could then rent. Low interest loans would go to very credit-worthy people (for example, 800 score or above) who want to buy properties that are being foreclosed on. The government would earn interest (and presumably actually get paid), and the real estate markets could get a boost. Loaning money to anyone who cannot repay it will not fix the current problems and, in the long run, will ultimately make the problem worse.
Forbes: To interject a question, then how do both of you feel about other types of "Cash for Clunkers" programs, such as for furniture and household goods, appliances, etc. Also, do you, generally speaking, think that the Cash for Clunkers program made a big enough difference that it’s worth trying to replicate the program elsewhere?
Rubin: Cash for Clunkers was a HUGE success. It cleared inventories, it got people working, it monetized the $3 billion tax-payer bill, by having individuals take money from their savings to buy a car. I think I have already stated my view on appliances' Cash for Clunkers: I think it is a great idea. One of the
inflatable arches best interest of the public.
I do not feel it would hamper a company approaching the FRB for help, as a company would only come in the most desperate of situations when it is either a do-or-die situation. They have already exhausted other means of financing.