"Our boss suggested that we could save the money for driving events in view of Corona for the next few years," reports a PR man who "does not want to be called" because "I then blocked this attempt to attack our press work." have". It may be that other managers have also thought of using the future corona normality to save in product communication; But they have not completely renounced the savings idea either.
Daimler wants to show tolerance. Anyone who realizes that tolerance from Latin actually means toleration immediately understands that tolerance cannot be used to campaign against racism. Tolerance is when you “tolerate” opinions other than your own without having to adopt them. You can (and should) tolerate people you don't like. You have to respect and respect everyone, that shouldn't be a question.
No joke, but remarkable words from a former leading propagandist of man-made climate change. "Climate change is taking place," he tweets. 'It's just not the end of the world. It's not even our most serious environmental problem. «
The current survey by the automobile club confirms the skepticism of many market researchers. Only 1,6 percent of the drivers surveyed would choose an electric car when buying a vehicle today. What kind of drive do drivers in Germany want?
There are few car books that are not only on the bookshelf, but should be read. This book should be read by everyone who is interested in post-war automotive history. Ex-star reporter and head of department Harald Kaiser communicates the success story of the automobile in Germany and the world with his “look in the rear-view mirror” in an exciting and fascinating way.
KEYOU founder Thomas Korn
Even the federal government has abandoned the focus on its single-track battery electromobility in favor of technology openness and pushed hydrogen technology to the top of the future agenda. Since hydrogen can be used to generate electricity in the fuel cell and can also drive a combustion engine as a substitute for gasoline or diesel, hydrogen seems to have more than just opportunities as the fuel of the future.
Nobody really believes what the PR heralds of the Volkswagen group announce: that Volkswagen ex-boss Herbert Diess has given the top job as brand boss in order to get "more freedom for his tasks as group boss" and to "focus on the big one" Whole “to be able to concentrate. This misunderstands: Volkswagen as a brand is the big picture! Is it a wise decision to disempower Herbert Diess? In any case, this decision is the clear signal that VW cannot be ruled against the works council.
So much ashes on the heads of those responsible could not even be noticed in terms of the Diesel Gate. The dust cloud will remain visible over Wolfsburg for a long time. Nevertheless, if you seriously believe (e) that the controversial VW commercial with a flicked-out colored one stems from racism, it has not only been since the online press conference on June 11.06th. not correct. But what everyone learned (should) from the case: It is not a question of which message is to be conveyed, but how it can be understood.
The car premium for "combustion engines" has been canceled, but battery cars and plug-in hybrids are to be promoted, although the latter are also powered by an internal combustion engine. As always, in the ideologically contaminated minefield of political intrigue, it is called a compromise or breakthrough.
Up until a few weeks ago, the hardcore electricity fraction in politics, the automotive industry and associations followed the motto "You shouldn't have any other gods besides the electric drive". They wish the internal combustion engine - no matter what fuel it would sip from its tank - to hell, that according to their wishes the climate policy desired salvation was to be found exclusively and solely in the electric drive with battery operation and electricity from the socket. Only in this way would environmentally friendly and green mobility be possible. VW chief Herbert Diess even insisted publicly that politicians shouldn't even think about alternatives.
Focus on design: but also practical
Volvo's reasoning seems plausible, but it is as wrong as a weather forecast for next Christmas. In order to justify the corporate decision to cordon off Volvos at 180 km / h in the future, Volvo reaches into the verbal bag of tricks, the arguments of which are physically correct, but are not true. That Volvo is talking about "protecting" the vehicles at 180 km / h instead of regulating them down is verbal nonsense. Why is a car safe under 180 km / h?
I had to watch the recording of the show Markus Lanz several times because I had doubts that I had understood the Green leader Robert Habeck correctly. But he said it really analogously: He is against purchase premiums for combustion engines, but then he contradicts himself: Purchase premiums could be granted if the cars were exchanged for e-mobiles as soon as they could be delivered.
