You state "That NAV stock remains attractive is still a matter of wonderment to us"

Cisco's CEO, John Chambers, once asked former GM CEO Jack Welch;

"Jack, what makes a company great?"

Jack: "A near-death experience."

Navistar has had its near-death experience: International Harvester.

After decades of restructuring, Navistar is on the verge of taking off as a phoenix on the wings of its leading-edge industrial technology.

That's why Jim Cramer sees that "NAVISTAR SHINES".

That's why investors see it as a good business to put their money in.

"....on the wings of its leading-edge industrial technology"

Could you qualify this statement? What proprietary leading edge industrial technology does Navistar possess?

http://messages.finance.yahoo.com/Stocks_%28A_to_Z%29/Stocks_N/threadview?m=tm&bn=12322&tid=44155&mid=44155&tof=40&rt=2&frt=2&off=1

There is only one technology here that might be deemed proprietary, and that is the 0.5 NOx compliant with credits EGR engine range. There may be a reason why this is proprietary, and why the MF's designer - MAN - has chosen not to pursue EGR beyond 440 bhp at Euro V: it is not fit for purpose. Being the sole possessor of an inappropriate technology does not seem to be, in this context, much reason for cheer.

You write that Navistar's "EGR ...is not fit for purpose." Your words are just that: words,i.e., an opinion of a wordsmith uninformed by facts. Uniformed opinions are in the vernecular called BS.

A poll of informed prospective buyers conducted by Navistar reported that 51% would buy EGR. Another poll conducted by SCR OEMs reported that 31% would buy EGR (up from 29% in a prior poll). Money speaks more convincingly than words on a blog.

Even if just 31% of buyers will buy EGR, that would give Navistar the No. 1 spot in market share, since Navistar is the only one that has EGR to sell.

Navistar's technologies need to be "proprietary" to be leading edge. For instance, Navistar's ProStar truck is the most aero dynamic in the industry, as certified by an independent testing company, and Navistar know how in getting components from suppliers and making diesel hybrids and electric trucks is in itself a technology.

Shine,

Over the past couple of months, you have never failed to entertain. However, your latest serves simply to disappoint.

You cite two polls, conducted, as you say, by the opposing sides in this argument. Can we expect either to be completely free of bias? Of course we can't. Could it be, for example, that those respondents polled might be existing customers of the respective marques? And, if so, would that not skew the results? Care to comment upon sample size, question construction and survey date? My inner statistician tells me that, without access to such data, you cannot deem these results to be anything other than opinion and guidance. Not fact.

However, one fact that I would defy you to take issue with is Navistar's singularity in its approach to EPA 10 / Euro VI / JP 09. It is a babe in arms in terms of the HD engine segment - MF has only been on the market for two years or so - and so Navistar is the newest player in the market - albeit with another company's rebadged engine. That the rest of the market has chosen to eschew EGR as unfit for purpose at the referenced emissions levels, and that Navistar - a newcomer to that same market - posits otherwise - leads me - and many others to assume that it is talking through its hat. However, as an issue of fact, NAV is in a minority of one in a market made up of many long term players. You assert that money talks louder than words on a blog. How many EPA 10 compliant engines has NAV sold yet? Or placed with operators for operator testing?

Your point about aerodynamics is a peculiar one. This is not an issue of proprietary technology; what happens if you strap a tanker to the fifth wheel of a Prostar? Would it out perform a Cascadia with a faring-equipped smooth sided van trailer? Probably not. Read the Ricardo report and we'll talk some more on this.

Comments pertaining to hybrids and electric vehicles put you very close to the edge of the abyss. Navistar has managed to bolt some components together - as has PCAR, DAI, VOLV and the rest. Component aggregation is not a proprietary technology, and it does not differentiate NAV from any other OEM. As for the Modec product, I can only state my admiration for NAV here; few other companies would have the crust to ask for a handout in order to develop a vehicle that has already been developed, produced and sold within Europe. Proprietary pan-handling maybe, but not proprietary technology.

Reading through your diatribe, I think you are suggesting that my opinion is uninformed by facts. This same observation may be made of much of the propaganda to have come out of Warrenville over the past few months. I have, therefore, to assume that you are in some way offering a compliment. As such, I thank you.

You're right, Navistar really doesn't have any impressive technology. Their new "Lonestar" tractor is a rolling eyesore, answering a question that nobody asked. Their "Citystar" low-cab-forward developed with Ford has a weak suspension and all-in-all doesn't compare well with its Japanese competitors. And don't get me started on how bad Navistar's electrical systems have been for years and years.

O. Dixon used twice the word "assume". Once, years ago, when I said to my then 6-year old son that I "assumed" something or other, he snapped back "Dad, don't assume. When you assume, you make an ass of you and me." So much for A. Dixon's own "diatribe", except to note that if he is correct in assuming that the people polled are already customers of the companies that had the polls done, then it makes Navistar's case even more compelling, because 31% of the customers of the SCR companies's own poll chose Navistar's EGR.

As to K.Scarbel statement that the Navistar's Lone Star is a "rolling eyesore", it proves the fact that beauty lies in the eyes of the beholder. To my eyes the Lone Star is stunning. And when it first came out scores of articles praised it from domestic and foreign sources, including a raving review by the New York Times.

BTW, more on EGR:

http://www.atzonline.com/index.php;do=show/site=a4e/sid=10101725254a9524ca136ec818554134/alloc=1/id=10336

http://www.todaystrucking.com/news.cfm?intDocID=22361

I respect your positive opinion of the Lonestar's appearance, but I have have yet to meet anyone that felt it was attractive. Most have very negative views, with the word ugly generally being used. More realistically, I feel Navistar introduced a truck that nobody was asking for based on the fact that these trucks have never sold well since their introduction.