Dr. Mike: I don't know that the 52% "insiders" number is accurate.
I've seen other discrepancies in Yahoo numbers. You might do better checking with your broker, OE, or the NYSE.
The gasoline thing really has people sitting on the edge of their chairs:
cbs.marketwatch.com
cbs.marketwatch.com
Don't worry about rekindling the SUV thing. No prolonged debates, but I will reply. Unless you choose vehicles of disproportionate size, the passenger car is generally safer than a truck (which includes all vans). Anyone telling you otherwise is selectively pulling out a certain test, such as disproportionate vehicle impacts. Just like on emissions and economy, trucks were not required to meet the same crash test standards as passenger cars. So if you get to choose between a full size passenger van and a full size sedan (such as a Ford Crown Victoria or Dodge Intrepid), choose the sedan. In most accidents the car will protect you better. And yes, the passenger car presents zero rollover risk on most roads. The weight of a vehicle is a very poor indicator of it's ability to protect occupants during impacts. It's much more complicated than that. Are the dashboard and seats designed to absorb impacts of passengers? Are there crush zones designed into the structure? Is the center of gravity high enough to make rollover a risk in a spin? As you know, injuries are caused by rapid deceleration. The key to minimizing the injury is slowing the deceleration. Which means you must absorb the energy. Weight doesn't inherently suggest that. Careful design, even of a lighter vehicle, will absorb more energy. Cars have long required such careful design. The government never anticipated the popularity of "trucks", and it took them a while to decide it isn't a fad and start to tighten truck crash standards. |
