History of the Automotive
Industry
The
automotive industry emerged in the late part of the nineteenth century. Then
technological innovation, improvements, and uncertainty ruled the day. In 1900, Ranson E. Olds sold 500 cars to
prove the commercial feasibility of the product .
The
entrepreneur Henry Ford appreciated the huge demand for a car priced such that
most Americans could afford it. Ford's
price sensitive strategy paid off when Model T came out in 1908. Demand that exceeded supply His strategy of
mass production and extensive dealer network resulted in a market share of more
than 50% in the early 1920s.
At
that time, multiple companies manufactured different autos, bringing
competition to the industry. Ford's
company stuck to his model of mass customization. Ford continued to develop
common cars (the products), which were mass-produced in long assembly lines
(the process), in a vertically integrated chain (supply chain). Alfred Sloan's General Motors proved a
formidable challenger as GM identified a change in the demand now that most
people had cars. Customers were 2nd time
auto buyers and marketing and management became the key strategic functions
that differentiated GM and Ford. Sloan
gave GMs operating units full autonomy, controlling production, marketing, purchasing,
and engineering. A general office
assured over-all coordination, control, and planning. These innovations in management became a
model for much of American industries.
GM
also worked on marketing to get the larger share of the auto industry. GM abandoned vertical integration and focused
on building "a car for every purse and purpose". GM turned to outside suppliers and producing
the largest array of products in the industry.
Emphasis on research directed by Charles P. Kettering improved the
performance of the various systems (axles, transmissions, etc.). The result, a car comfortable to drive and
more pleasing to the eye, appealed immensely to the customers.
The
Chrysler Corporation took advantage of Ford's slippage to gain a foothold in
the market. By 1929 Chrysler offered four
basic car lines: Chrysler, DeSoto, Dodge and Plymouth. Because Chrysler was less vertically
integrated than Ford or GM, it could seek competitive advantage through
flexibility in product engineering and styling.
This strategy proved very successful while when the rate of technical
change in the product was rapid. Once
product design were stabilized, other factors such as strength of dealership
and economies of scale became more important.
Later
in the century, imports started to play an important part in the US
market. In the specialty and luxury
segment in the US, Mercedes, BMW, and Triumph played an important part. VW, by firmly establishing itself in America
with dealers initially and latter with a production facility, maintained a
strong market presence well into the 1970s.
At that time, inflation, government price control, increase in oil
prices, and consumer's loss of buying power affected the firms differently.
In
the recent years, trends in the industry have been spurt by some of the issues from
the past such as government regulation, competition from imports, and also now
the Internet frenzy.
Government
regulations have recently made the automakers revise their engine designs to
control car emissions. Improvement in
production systems by Toyota allowed them to enter the US market and become a
key player globally. US auto companies
have recently engaged in revamping their production systems to answer that
challenge, and this includes shallow integration as was Chrysler's strategy in
the 1930s and 1940s. Lastly, the big
three auto companies in North America have combined to develop the industry's
largest and dominating market exchange -this after launching ideas
independently. This is to leverage the
information technology available to reduce the cycle time to develop vehicles
and to satisfy customer orders.
In this historical context, the rest of the paper is
set. The current situation of the OEMs
and suppliers is discussed, followed by how this is changing under the
pressures of regulation, technology, and competition. Lastly, we discussed what in our opinion the
future will bring for the industry and the players in it.
Similar to many other industries, the automotive
industry is rapidly evolving. The
largest forces impacting this increasing clockspeed are the globalization of
competition, regulatory changes, and rapid advances in information
technology. These developments are
affecting all parts of the automotive supply chain. We will consider how these developments are
impacting two specific players – the OEM’s and Tier-1 Suppliers – and what
strategies these groups might consider adopting to compete in this new
environment.
Rapid Evolution
Similar to many other industries, the automotive
industry is rapidly evolving. The
largest forces causing this increasing clockspeed are the globalization of
competition, regulatory changes, and rapid advances in information
technology. These developments are
affecting all parts of the automotive supply chain. We will consider how these developments are
impacting two specific players – the OEM’s and Tier-1 Suppliers – and what
strategies these groups might consider adopting to compete in this new
environment.
Automobile Sub-Systems
The supply chain for the automobile is quite complex. Determining the boundaries of this chain is
difficult because the value proposition offered by automobile manufacturers is
evolving dramatically. Traditionally,
the supply chain started with raw materials that went into sub-assemblies and
ended with distribution of the vehicle to the final customer, excluding
servicing of the vehicle. Today, the
starting boundary is not much different.
The end is, however, very much unclear.
In a rethinking of their strategies, OEM’s today are attacking
untraditional areas. The chain has been
extended downstream to account for many services and offerings that can now be
offered due to advances in information technology.
Traditional
System Make/Buy Decision
Traditionally, the automobile was considered to be a
collection of sub-systems. Different
OEM’s seemed inclined to focus on internally developing certain key sub-systems
while outsourcing systems they didn’t deem to be critical. The common thread among all OEM’s, however,
was that they all played an integration role and understood how these systems
fit together and maintained sufficient capacity and knowledge to execute this
portion of the supply chain. Below is a
list of some of the key systems and who in the chain has handled that part of
the chain.
Systems Traditional Today Tomorrow?
Interiors OEM’s Tier-1
Engine OEM’s OEM’s, Tier-1
Transmission OEM’s OEM’s, Tier-1
Body OEM’s OEM’s
Electronics OEM’s Tier-1
The trend definitely seems to be to outsource more
of these components to Teir-1 suppliers or possibly further upstream to Tier-2
suppliers. In order to determine whether
this outsourcing makes sense to the OEM’s, it is helpful to use Fine’s Matrix
of Organizational Dependency. This
matrix is helpful and forces us to consider whether a particular technology or
portion of the chain might be the high value link that controls the rents or
profits. To consider this point, let us
look deeper into engines.
Automakers have begun to share engine technology. A combination of factors had led to this
decision. Because about a third of the
average car price of $22,000 is made up of the costs of the engine and drive
train, automakers are deciding to outsource this part of the value chain to
more efficient producers in an effort to improve their cost and profit
structure. Another part of this decision is due to the regulatory environment
facing the industry. DaimlerChrysler,
wanting to wean itself from the gas-guzzling Mercedes engines, has formed
acquired a large equity share of Mitsubishi and will use their fuel-efficient
engines to meet stiff European emissions regulations set to take effect in
2008. Lastly, the common belief is that
engines and their accompanying performance are much less of a differentiator and
will continue to decrease in driving the final consumer purchasing decision.
The engine is becoming more and more modular. The lifecycle of an engine is still rather
long and only minor changes are made during this time period. Thus, the clockspeed is rather slow. Few suppliers have the knowledge to develop
engines or the capability and capacity to manufacture them. Fine’s matrix would thus classify this as the
worst outsourcing decision. The few
suppliers may have the potential to control the rents in the supply chain if
they can develop a pull for their technology.
To develop a pull, engine suppliers will have to market their superior
technology and reliability to the final consumer so that the brand influences
the purchasing decision. Thus, OEM’s
should be wary if they only focus on a couple of suppliers. At the very least, OEM’s should consider
developing this capability in additional suppliers or continue to invest in
maintaining a sufficient level of knowledge in the latest technological developments
so that they don’t become trapped in relying on these few powerful suppliers.
Most of the other listed sub-systems fall into the
same category in the matrix. Automakers
must thus be cautious of the few suppliers developing these systems. The exception is electronics. There seems to be a sufficient supplier base
for these sub-systems.
Industry Transformation -
Internet Clockspeed
The clockspeed of the automobile, which has
traditionally been driven by the frequency of model and engine introductions,
is being driven by the speed of the internet and the services that it has
enabled. More and more, new systems are
emerging that the automakers feel will drive important in driving these same
purchasing decisions. Traditional
purchasing decisions have been driven by such factors as styling, performance,
and quality and reliability. New systems
that are gaining in importance and in influencing consumer demand are
multimedia and entertainment systems that offer features such as digital audio,
video games, etc. Safety and security
systems are also gaining in importance.
Many of these systems will most likely be integrated through a standard
vehicle interface. For example, GM’s
Onstar system maintains a standard interface via a couple of buttons on the
rear view mirror. A central service
center is networked with the vehicle to provide concierge services and assist
the driver in the event of an emergency.
They have also begun to sell a voice-based internet service via this
same interface.
These services all full under the “telematics”
umbrella. Telematics merge wireless and
satellite based services. It is not
clear if there will be a clear-cut standard interface, but many different companies
are emerging to try to become the standard or one of the major ones that
survives. Many companies are forming
alliances to try to reap these rewards.
Delphi has allied with Palm to attempt to make the Palm the standard
interface to deliver voice enabled internet services to the vehicle via a
communications port. GM is banking on
the Onstar interface, Ford’s soon to be spun off Visteon division is also
involved in such an effort. These firms
are allying with traditional electronic and entertainment firms such as Sony,
Sega, etc. Many further services will be
added in the future such as satellite delivered music service. These developments are occurring at a
tremendous pace and at times seem to be directionless. However, the name of the game right now is
speed and companies often times are moving rapidly because of the fear of
simply falling behind. Our belief is
that a standard interface should be developed to permit the modularization of
many of accompanying physical hardware and services. This standardization is a necessary product
due to the increased efficiencies and scale that it will provide.
Many other forces are acting to shape the new
automotive environment. A discussion of
these follows.
B2B
Net marketplaces are being hailed by Wall Street and
are thought to offer tremendous potential savings to the OEM’s. OEM’s initially began to develop their own
net marketplaces in the hope that they could build some sort of strategic
advantage over their competitors. They
quickly came to the realization that the supply base among the OEM’s has a lot
of overlap and that many of these suppliers were unwilling to invest in the
knowledge and technology to support multiple exchanges. Consolidation among these exchanges was bound
to occur. The complexity of a supplier
operating under several differing standards is not realistic. Additionally, a net marketplace benefits from
scale. The larger the size of the user
base and orders made via the network, the larger the potential cost
savings. Thus, a combined exchange is
much more efficient.
Ford, General Motors, and DaimlerChrysler
collaborated and agreed to consolidate these activities and form a single
automotive exchange. Renault and Nissan
have also joined this exchange. There
are a few companies that are resisting this business collaboration. Volkswagen has said that it will setup an
independent digital marketplace. Other
companies, such as Toyota and Peugeot are waiting to make a move. They want to see whether OEM’s can
collaborate via these joint exchanges before deciding whether to join.
B2B refers to any systems that permit companies to
communicate with one another. Thus,
systems that permit companies to more efficiently develop products or pass
along production orders also classifies as a B2B system. These will be explained in depth later and
provide a great opportunity to improve the flow of communication and
efficiency.
Globalization
Scale is becoming increasingly important. Scale is especially important in R&D
where many organizations that would go it alone are allying, merging or being
acquired. New technology developments
are too expensive and inefficient for one company to attempt to master
alone. Furthermore, environmental
concerns are driving new product development costs up. These efficiency scales due to centralized
R&D have been too attractive for many companies to pass up.
Globalization is also vital from the standpoint that
emerging automotive markets throughout the world provide tremendous
opportunities for companies that establish an early presence in these
regions. This globalization hedges
against a downturn in the home market.
Unions
Unions and other established political organizations
are having a difficult time adapting to these potentially disruptive and large
changes. The best situation for the
automakers to adopt is a win-win strategy with the unions. Eventually, the unions will have to embrace
some of the changes. Change in all
industries is becoming inevitable. If an
OEM that is not as tied to the unions embraces many of the changes, the union
will ave to accept the changes or risk losing membership due to OEM
uncompetitiveness. Automakers must take
a clear case for change and the potential consequences of failing to embrace
these new technologies and strategies.
Regulation
Many OEM’s are now introducing fuel-efficient
vehicles with hybrid engines. Honda and
Toyota already have models available on the market. Ford and G.M. have developed prototypes and
plan to bring models to the market shortly.
These investments in many ways are a hedge against the regulatory
risks. As previously mentioned,
DaimlerChrysler acquired a major stake in Mitsubishi partly because of
tightening environmental regulation.
This regulation is such that it is requiring new, potentially disruptive
technologies.
Different regulatory worldwide standards make
product development extremely expensive.
Automakers must often times have to tailor models to meet local or
regional standards. Regulations would
also benefit from global standardization as this would greatly reduce product
development costs and allow a true worldwide vehicle to be marketed and sold in
numerous countries.
Customer
Relationships
Customers are attempting to establish brands that
garner consumer loyalty. No one is more
vocal about this than Ford’s CEO Jac Nasser who thinks it is possible for Ford
to leverage a strong brand the same way that Coca-Cola or Procter & Gamble
does. An earlier picture depicted the
average spending costs over a 10-year period of a vehicle. These are the true life cycle costs of the
vehicle, and as such OEM’s have begun to recognize these services as being
integral parts of the consumer value chain.
Many items are listed that the OEM’s have traditionally not
supplied. Times are changing, however,
and so are OEM strategies. OEM’s are
beginning to offer cell phone services and are in the process of packaging this
service through new vehicle communications systems. Not included in the list are aftermarket
products and services that are also gaining the attention of the OEM’s.
OEM’s have changed their perspective and are now
considering the value they can deliver (and profit on) to the customer over the
entire life of the vehicle from the time it is assembled and delivered to the
consumer to the time it is retired and must be recycled. Ford is investigating methods of recycling
and has begun investing possible strategies.
By tracking the progression of vehicles from cradle to grave, Ford can
truly become intimate with customer uses and perceptions related to their
automobiles while simultaneously acquiring new automotive related revenue
streams. d has even opened a driving
school and considers this to be a part of the automotive value chain. This may be part of a greater plan to entice younger
drivers to buy a Ford. This is part of a
new effort to get a lifelong lock on the consumer’s automotive spending. Ford is also targeting the youth through
various other marketing channels such as Nickelodean.
The question needs to be asked as to whether OEM’s
are losing sight of their core business and what impact this may have longer
term as they outsource traditionally vital systems and become more service and
consumer oriented. From a marketing
viewpoint, getting close to the consumer and understanding their deepest
feelings and attitudes is invaluable.
Thus, many of these businesses do allow the OEM’s to link up with
consumers and are very valuable if this information is fed back and managed
through the proper channels. Ultimately,
Ford and other OEM’s want to be more consumer-oriented and have consumer
company valuations. They want their
brand name and image to be one of the items governing the purchasing
decision. This is currently a decision
variable, but is much stronger for luxury and sports cars than it is for
standard coupes and sedans. Ultimately,
it is possible for the OEM’s to position themselves so that branding and
marketing are the key competitive factors.
If it can be done for toilet paper, than surely it can be done for an automobile.
The True
Driving Force of Change
The largest force driving change is the need to
address value from the consumer’s perspective.
B2B is a big enabler that will help OEM’s gain efficiency by linking
plants, suppliers, and dealers via the Internet to reduce the order-to-delivery
cycle. This cycle time is important and
would offer tremendous value to a consumer if it could be reduced. Customers would be able to order a customized
car configuration and have it delivered within a reasonable time frame. Thus, the true goal is an integrated system
that will somehow help lower this cycle time and in the process lower costs.
OEM’s are looking to build online ordering systems
that will track consumer tastes and be more responsive to consumer demands. These systems are worthless unless this
information is fed back to lead to improved products and processes that will be
able meet these demands. Thus, online
order systems must be tied into supply chain systems and other company systems
that will allow orders for custom cars to flow seamlessly through the supply
chain. These are the really high
potential B2B systems. Dell has been the
model that many have and are benchmarking.
Many are beginning to see modular assembly as the answer, where
suppliers will develop systems and own the inventory. Under such a system, OEM’s are simply the
integrators of these systems and require a different set of skills and
capabilities. These capabilities are
being addressed, however, and rely on the OEM’s being much more
consumer-oriented.
The backend of these B2B systems will be the
challenge and must be developed to enable the front end to meet the consumer
demands. Streamlining the systems to
allow for an input order to flow through the supply chain and trigger production
orders throughout the chain is the ultimate goal. In the process, this would lower the need for
large inventory banks as upstream suppliers would have transparent information
and would know the downstream demand needs.
i2 Technologies and other B2B software providers currently offer such
system solutions, but are far from ideal.
Ultimately, the entire supply chain must be interconnected and able to
communicate to meet such stringent customer needs.
Striking alliances to build this backend is critical. OEM’s are teaming up with highly regarded
information technology experts such as Oracle, Commerce One, and i2
Technologies.
Supplier Perspective
For many years, OEM's and
suppliers in the auto industry have coexisted sharing benefits and risks;
however, their relationships and ways to operate have not always been sweet.
The industry was used to see OEM's reaping suppliers making them fight for the
scarce profits and leftovers of the big automakers; however, the story is
different today. The increase in complexity and pace of technological
innovations have made OEMs look for partners that can solve their design
problems and offer innovative solutions to their needs.
By common consensus, tier-I suppliers in the auto
industry have more than $10b in total sales, followed by tier-II and III
suppliers having $5b-$10b and $2.5-$5 of total sales, respectively, with 40
suppliers accounting for 80% of total sales in the industry. One might argue
that suppliers are gaining momentum in the industry and perhaps this is true
but not to the extent to threaten big automakers. The reasons behind this
temporary success of suppliers reside in their core capabilities developed and
mastered throughout the years. Suppliers have improved dramatically their relationships
with OEM's by deploying smart teams of managers and engineers interfacing with
their automaker counterparts. Suppliers have been able to understand market
demands for latest technologies delivering quality products in short periods of
time. They have been able to cut cost while improving overall performance from
the customer point of view but most importantly the need of systems integration
as well as technology breakthroughs have created long term relationships
between both parties. Finally, suppliers have responded to customer demands
delivering product all over the world.
As
of today, suppliers have relied mainly in four major areas for growth; first by
capturing additional value added when OEM's outsource systems and modules.
Second, by continuous innovation of products achieved by high expenditures in
R&D. Third, by diversification and capture of new potential markets; and
four by slashing competition capturing current market share. Also, suppliers
are striving to provide and sell more profitable sub-assemblies and systems and
not just individual parts. A good way to understand the forces and dynamics in
the auto industry is by using an adapted double helix.
Relationships
Between OEM's and Suppliers
In the past, OEM's competed with suppliers in terms
of profits and existing technology. There was a complete lack of integration
and a clear separation of both parties. Suppliers were bidding all the time to
get contracts, and most of the times, at expense of eroded profits and higher
costs. As we can see, a war was held between suppliers and manufactures in the
automotive industry. However, new approaches try to redeem the mistakes made in
the past were a new concept of partnership is emerging abandoning useless
competitions. Today, suppliers work from the beginning with OEM's when
developing new products integrating new concepts at early stages of the design.
Basically, the system is changing from competitive quoting to a one of target
costing.
With respect to the new megamergers among big
automakers, tier-I suppliers have reacted accordingly trying to do similar
mergers with other suppliers or simply acquiring other business to include
their product portfolio. In the next years, we will see a big supplier
consolidation activity as an effective measure to counterattack megamergers of
big automakers. There is of course a big increase in price pressure forcing
suppliers to merge for achieving economies of scale. Another point concerning
the M&A trend would be perhaps the increase in globalization in the whole
industry and the centralization of R&D and manufacturing capabilities to
increase the learning effect curves.
From the supplier perspective, when the level of integration skills is
low but the innovation capabilities for the overall system is high; there is
pressure to become a specialist. On the other hand, when the integration skills
are high and the innovation capability is also high, suppliers tend to become
more of a systems-integrator type. The other two cases would be the component
and module supplier. A module supplier is someone who has high integration
skills but not necessarily high innovation capabilities. A component supplier
has low scores for both integration skills and innovation capabilities.
Technology
and electronics in the automotive industry
Electronics has revolutionized the automotive
industry and has reshaped the supply chain management. In the future all the
cars will be multiplexed and connected to a central computer acting as the
brain of the system. The electronics revolution is already happening and the
main goal would be connecting the car to the outside world. However, few people
describe another way of communicating internally the car or multiplexing the
car linking powertrain and comfort products (i.e. park assist sensors, door
module, instrument panel cluster, etc.). The electronics revolution can be
summarized into four different transition stages. The first one is concerned to
the substitution of mechanical/hydraulic components by
electromechanical/electronic components. The second stage refers to
multiplexing internally the car, three different protocols already exist in the
market and they are the class-II protocol, CAN-Bus protocol, and VAN-Bus protocol.
Class-II protocol is used in NA, Latin America, and Japan, principally. GM
developed the protocol as a way to reduce electrical connections among
components and for diagnostic purposes. The CAN-Bus is widely used in Europe,
especially in Germany, it was developed under the same principle but the coding
is different. Finally, the VAN-Bus was developed in France and it is currently
used in some automotive applications in Peugeot-Citroen and Renault. The third
stage refers to connecting the vehicle to the outside world; this application
is being used for route guiding, information entertainment, dynamic traffic
control, etc. The final stage refers to making the auto a mobile office with a
PC and computer peripherals.
Future Trends
The following points briefly describe probable
trends in the automotive industry and factors that will lead to their need.
Reduced Vehicle
Platforms – As consolidation occurs and scale becomes more important, cost
becomes an even greater competitive focus.
A reduction in vehicle platforms will allow OEM’s to reduce the costs
associated with a particular vehicle model.
Increased Model Variety
– Even though the number of vehicle platforms will decrease, there is a demand
for a greater variety of vehicles to fulfill diverse customer taste. If large OEM’s are unwilling to meet these
demands, niche producers will be willing to do this for a premium. Thus, the number of models per platform will
explode.
Continued Consolidation
– Globalization and increasing product development costs are driving the need
to compete by increasing scale. This
will continue and consolidation will continue.
This will increase so much that some studies project as few as eight
OEM’s by the year 20106.
Brand Competition –
The brand will become more and more of a competing factor. The many initiatives that OEM’s such as Ford
have begun will only multiply as they rush to build their brand years in
advance of a consumer’s purchasing decision.
OEM Modularization –
The forces of the double-helix will continue to push OEM’s to be more
modularized. OEM’s must accept this and
make the appropriate make/buy decisions while focusing on their own brand
recognition.
Reduced Development Time
– While B2B initiatives are currently focused on purchasing, the focus will
shift to using information technology advances to improve communication flow
and bring products to market faster.
This may have an even more dramatic impact on firm profitability as
time-to-market becomes even more important.
Supplier Branding –
As OEM’s outsource many modules, suppliers will have to develop a brand name to
establish a market pull for their technologies.
OEM’s will need to be aware of such attempts and maintain sufficient
capabilities in alternative supply sources to avoid being held captive.
Supplier Relationships
– The OEM integrator role will make it expensive to manage relationships with
many suppliers. Thus, OEM’s will reduce
the number of suppliers to lower the relationship costs. The number of suppliers will be a sufficient
tradeoff of the relationship costs and the costs of potentially being held
captive if the suppliers are too few.
Roland Berger estimate an expected global supplier base of 30-50
suppliers7.
Telematics / Networking
– The rapid advances in information technology will lead to the changing of the
automobile as we know it. Everything
will change in the name of convenience.
Sometime during this century, the government will have set up an
Intelligent Vehicle Highway Safety where a central computer will communicate
with networked vehicles and take them to their destination. Technology must greatly improve to do this
and we are many decades away from this advance.
Other advances, such as remote diagnostics will come much sooner, as
vehicles become networked and OEM’s rush to deliver value to consumers. This is not without danger, however, as some
consumers may not like to know that OEM’s have access to their whereabouts at
all times.
keywords: illinois asbestos attorney, alabama lawyer mesothelioma, mesothelioma attorney, asbestos lawyer, mesothelioma lawyers, asbestos attorney, mesothelioma lawyer, asbestos cancer attorney, texas asbestos lawyer, illinois mesothelioma lawyer, mesothelioma attorneys, mesothelioma litigation, mesothelioma attorney texas, mesothelioma attorney houston, illinois mesothelioma attorney, texas mesothelioma attorney, new york mesothelioma lawyers, minnesota mesothelioma lawyer, atlanta asbestos attorneys, new york mesothelioma attorneys, pennsylvania mesothelioma lawyers, phoenix dui attorney, dui attorney phoenix, arizona dui attorneys, dui lawyer arizona, phoenix dui lawyers, dui attorney arizona, phoenix arizona dui lawyer, arizona dui attorney, arizona dwi attorney, phoenix dui lawyer, arizona dui lawyer, dui lawyer phoenix, arizona dui lawyers, dui lawyer scottsdale, scottsdale dui attorney, dui attorneys arizona, tempe dui lawyer, az dui attorney, dui attorney scottsdale, automobile, mechanical engineering, autocad training,auto insurance, car insurance, car insurance quote, insurance quotes, low cost insurance, cheap insurance, cheap car insurance, cheap auto insurance, car cheapest insurance, car insurance quotes, automobile insurance, auto insurance quote, cheap car insurance quote, discount auto insurance, car insurance online, insurance rates, car insurance online quote, cheapest car insurance, ebay, free, hotels, hotel, travel, free travel, free hotels, free cars, free home, free insurance, free place, cheap travel, free internet, ebay, free, hotels, hotel, travel, free travel, free hotels, free cars, free home, free insurance, free place, cheap travel, free internet, ebay, free, hotels, hotel, travel, free travel, free hotels, free cars, free home, free insurance, free place, cheap travel, free internet, ebay, free, hotels, hotel, travel, free travel, free hotels, free cars, free home, free insurance, free place, cheap travel, free internet, ebay, free, hotels, hotel, travel, free travel, free hotels, free cars, free home, free insurance, free place, cheap travel, free internet, ebay, free, hotels, hotel, travel, free travel, free hotels, free cars, free home, free insurance, free place, cheap travel, free internet, ebay, free, hotels, hotel, travel, free travel, free hotels, free cars, free home, free insurance, free place, cheap travel, free internet, ebay, free, hotels, hotel, travel, free travel, free hotels, free cars, free home, free insurance, free place, cheap travel, free internet, ebay, free, hotels, hotel, travel, free travel, free hotels, free cars, free home, free insurance, free place, cheap travel, free internet, ebay, free, hotels, hotel, travel, free travel, free hotels, free cars, free home, free insurance, free place, cheap travel, free internet, ebay, free, hotels, hotel, travel, free travel, free hotels, free cars, free home, free insurance, free place, cheap travel, free internet, ebay, free, hotels, hotel, travel, free travel, free hotels, free cars, free home, free insurance, free place, cheap travel, free internet, ebay, free, hotels, hotel, travel, free travel, free hotels, free cars, free home, free insurance, free place, cheap travel, free internet, ebay, free, hotels, hotel, travel, free travel, free hotels, free cars, free home, free insurance, free place, cheap travel, free internet, ebay, free, hotels, hotel, travel, free travel, free hotels, free cars, free home, free insurance, free place, cheap travel, free internet
