Foreign Exchange (FOREX) is the arena where a nation’s currency is exchanged for that of another. The foreign exchange market is the largest financial market in the world, with the equivalent of over $1.9 trillion changing hands daily; more than three times the aggregate amount of the US Equity and Treasury markets combined. Unlike other financial markets, the Forex market has no physical location and no central exchange (off-exchange). It operates through a global network of banks, corporations and individuals trading one currency for another. The lack of a physical exchange enables the Forex market to operate on a 24-hour basis, spanning from one zone to another in all the major financial centers.

Traditionally, retail investors’ only means of gaining access to the foreign exchange market was through banks that transacted large amounts of currencies for commercial and investment purposes. Trading volume has increased rapidly over time, especially after exchange rates were allowed to float freely in 1971. Today, importers and exporters, international portfolio managers, multinational corporations, speculators, day traders, long-term holders and hedge funds all use the FOREX market to pay for goods and services, transact in financial assets or to reduce the risk of currency movements by hedging their exposure in other markets.

MG Financial, now operating in over 100 countries, serves all manner of clients, comprising speculators and strategic traders. Whether it’s day-traders looking for short-term gains, or fund managers wanting to hedge their non-US assets, MG’s DealStation™ allows them to participate in FOREX trading by providing a combination of live quotes, Real-Time charts, and news and analysis that attracts traders with an orientation towards fundamental and/or technical analysis.

The 2011 Cruze is the all-new compact sedan from Chevrolet; it replaces the Cobalt, a just-good-enough car that seemed to appeal to rental car companies rather than retail buyers. But Chevy’s got a plan in place to avoid the Cobalt’s fate: The Cruze is designed to leapfrog the competition in terms of features, safety, and perceived value. Can the Cruze pull it off? Or is this just another ho-hum compact from Detroit? Read on. Price range $16,995 – $27,120, EPA fuel economy estimates not yet announced.

To say that the new Chevrolet Cruze is a nicer car than the Cobalt it replaces is really no big deal; back when I was a kid, I built forts out of blankets and rocking chairs that were nicer than the Cobalt. No, the real question is how the Cruze will stack up against the Honda Civic and the Toyota Corolla. And that’s an issue that’s not as simple as it seems. Designing a nicer car than the Civic or the Corolla isn’t terribly difficult, but most people don’t buy Civics and Corollas because they are nice cars. They buy them because the Honda and Toyota badges are about as close as you can get to a guarantee of quality and reliability.

There’s a perception among many buyers that Japanese cars are simply better than American cars, and no matter what the domestic automakers do, it seems we simply aren’t willing to cut them a break. The folks at General Motors know this — despite what many pundits say, GM really is run by some very smart people — so they’ve resorted to a new tactic with the Cruze: Bribery.

Let’s say you’re one of those people who thinks Japanese cars are better. (If you’re not, I can save you some time: The Cruze is nicer than the Ford Focus and the Dodge Caliber, so you may as well just go ahead and buy one.) What would it take for you to take a chance on a domestic car? GM seems to be hoping that the answer is to shower buyers with value. I’ve used the phrase “a lot of car for the money” before, but GM has taken this to a whole new level with the Cruze.

In the Driver’s Seat: Fantastic features, unbeatable safety

Controls are simple, if a bit scattered; four-tone interior shown here is from the top-of-the-line Cruze LTZPhoto © Aaron Gold

Larger interior photo

$16,995 buys a Cruze LS with all the basics (power windows, mirrors and locks, air conditioning, and a CD player), but what’s really impressive is the list of standard safety equipment: Antilock brakes, electronic stability control, and ten, count ‘em, ten airbags. Besides the usual six (dual front airbags, front-seat-mounted side (torso) airbags, and two-row side curtain airbags), the Cruze gets back-seat-mounted torso airbags and driver and front passenger knee airbags (very important — the underside of the dash can bash up your knees something awful). That’s a commitment to safety that none of the Cruze’s competitors can match.

Cruze LT, LTZ and Eco models are powered by this 138 horsepower 1.4 liter turbocharged engine. Transmission choices are a 6-speed manual or a 6-speed automatic.

It’s been over a decade since the Chrysler PT Cruiser kicked off a wave of retro design that looked fresh and hip at the turn of the millennium. So when Chrysler announced that 2010 would be the last model year for the PT, I decided to take one last look at the five-door wagon. Is this modern-day classic still worth buying? Read on. $18,275 base, $20,445 as tested, EPA fuel economy estimates 19 mpg city/24 mpg highway

Chrysler takes a hands-off approach to its vehicles. Once they hit the market, that’s it. No changes, no upgrades, no marketing. If it sells, it sells. If it doesn’t, just kill it off in a few years. When a vehicle like the PT Cruiser remains in the lineup for over a decade, it becomes a time machine. When I picked up Aaron Gold for a ride in the PT one evening, he sat in the driver’s seat and said, “Hello, 1999.” A 2010 PT Cruiser is virtually indistinguishable from the original PT Cruiser of model year 2001, which debuted at the North American International Auto Show in Detroit in 1999.

Designed by Brian Nesbitt, a graduate of Pasadena’s famous Art Center College of Design, the PT Cruiser evokes classic automotive design cues. There’s a little bit of Chrysler Airflow from the 1930s, there’s a bit of gangster classics from the 1920s, a little bit of bread truck from the 1940s, all remixed with a hot-rodder’s casual iconoclasm. PT Cruiser was a hit, garnering design awards upon its debut. It has even spawned a cult following, PT Cruiser fanatics who personalize their PTs with bolt-on accessories and designer color schemes. It’s the ideal collector car for non-car people — affordable, drivable, and cute.

The PT looks smaller in person than it does in photos. The long hood makes a nice counterpoint to the rounded-box shape of the cabin. Just don’t look too closely at the plastic grille (link goes to photo) or any of the gaps or seams, because you’ll be ready to replace every part you can from the aftermarket catalogs.

The 2010 Chevrolet Camaro is easily the most-anticipated new car of the 2010 model year, with head-turning styling, gobs of power, and an amazingly reasonable price. Does the all-new 2010 Camaro live up to the hype? Read on. Price range $22,995 – $38,905, EPA fuel economy estimates 16-18 MPG city, 25-29 MPG highway.

Imagine you meet the girl — or guy — of your dreams. She, or he, is everything you ever wanted in a mate: Gorgeous looks, fantastic body, reasonable price, choice of 304 horsepower V6 or 426 hp V8. (I realize I’m pushing the metaphor a bit here, but bear with me.) She’s/he’s perfect! So you go out for a long drive on a twisty road… and to your complete disbelief, you find that the two of you aren’t really hitting it off.

That’s how it went with my 2010 Chevrolet Camaro test drive.

Let’s start with the looks. Chevrolet’s goal wasn’t to re-create the original Camaro, as Chrysler did with the Dodge Challenger; rather they seem to want to tap into the broad appeal of the Ford Mustang. Chevy figures that about one-third of Camaro buyers will be nostalgia-seekers, and the rest will buy the Camaro because it’s cool in the here-and-now — “21st century sports car” is their term. (We’ll debate that later.) There are cues from Camaros of the late 60s, but it’s a thoroughly modern design, and if you think it looks cool in pictures, you should see it in person. Some cars look like they’re going fast when they’re standing still. The Camaro looks like it’s going to beat you unconscious, strap a silly hat to your head, invite a couple of other Camaros over to take photos of you, then e-mail them to all your friends and co-workers. Call me crazy, but I like that in a car.

he Camaro’s base engine is a 3.6 liter V6 that delivers a healthy 304 horsepower, 96 more than a Mustang V6 and only 15 less than a Mustang V8. Thanks to direct fuel injection, it delivers respectable fuel economy on 87-octane gas. The SS gets a Corvette-sourced 6.2 liter V8 good for 426 hp — one more than the Challenger SRT8 — with the manual trans, but only 400 with the automatic. The manual’s clutch is difficult to modulate and the shifter is sized for people with Hulk hands, but the automatic is top notch, with a Sport mode that always knows which gear to pick and does so with firm, solid shifts, just like an old-time muscle car.

Personally, I like both engines. The V6 delivers lots of punch with reasonable decorum and the V8 makes marvelous noises, though if you opt for the stick-shift you have to rev it up to 3 or 4 grand before it really starts to haul the mail.

What about handling? The Camaro certainly grips the road well, but it goes through the corners with a slightly disconnected feel, as if the chassis isn’t 100% fluent in whatever language the steering wheel is speaking. V8 models have a stiffer suspension (plus huge brakes) and drive a bit better, and both versions ride comfortably. But the Camaro’s width — exaggerated by the slit-shaped windshield and broad hood — is intimidating on narrow roads. Chevy wants the Camaro to take on proper sports cars like the Nissan 370Z, and while the Camaro delivers a 426 hp V8 for about the same price ($30,995) as the Z’s 330 hp V6, there’s more to a sports car than power. The Camaro just isn’t in the same league.

Cadillac brought me (and a bunch of other automotive journalists) up to Napa Valley, California to drive some late pre-production examples of the 2011 CTS Coupe. The production vehicles are scheduled to go on sale in early August 2010 in the United States. Napa Valley in mid-June was the perfect venue to unveil the Coupe. The sleepy wine-growing region has a split personality. It is quaintly rural and agricultural, with sun baked pickup trucks parked in front of faded red barns, and rows of chest-high grape vines lining the fields. The rural front barely conceals opulent wealth, with manor houses lurking in the hills, world-class restaurants on the main streets, and wealthy weekenders strolling the sidewalks.

The CTS Coupe has a very angular, almost avant garde look. Cadillac bragged that it is virtually identical to the 2008 concept car (link goes to photo) that inspired its production. The Coupe shares virtually no sheetmetal with the CTS Sedan, wearing a lower roofline, a steeper windshield, a one-piece stamped roof and rear fender piece and a wider rear track. Front and rear fenders hug the wheels tighter on the Coupe than on the Sedan; door handles have been shaved off and replaced with recessed electromechanical switches. The rear deck looks higher, by virtue of a super-cool integral center high mounted stop light (CHMSL in designer-speak) that also forms a rear spoiler on the trunk. Cadillac’s now signature vertical LED taillight array dresses each rear corner. This is a design that demands attention, and presents a different look from each angle of approach.

Cadillac’s resurgence has been a marvel to watch. The latest move away from “old rich guy’s car” is the 2011 Cadillac CTS Coupe. With the new CTS Coupe, Cadillac is making a serious stab at the sports coupe realm, which has been pretty much owned by the Europeans (with a few Japanese exceptions) for the past 20 years or so. The 2011 Cadillac CTS Coupe will arrive in four different configurations priced from $38,990 to $62,990 (plus options), each with a 4 year/50,000 mile basic warranty, a 5 year/100,000 mile powertrain warranty, and EPA fuel economy estimates from 17 city/25 highway to 18 city/27 highway. Let’s drive.

Though Cadillac’s exterior designs have gained much attention during its recent resurgence, recent improvements in its interiors have left me most impressed. CTS Coupe’s dashboard is a thing of beauty, with luxurious cut and stitch covering, a great mix of textures and feels, and scarcely a wrong note anywhere. The instrument panel above the steering wheel is a model of simplicity, with three cylindrical gauge pods housing mostly analog instruments. Every CTS Coupe that I drove was equipped with a navigation package, which meant that it also got a cool, James Bond-esque control screen that rises up out of the center console when activated.

CTS Coupe’s front seats are a far cry from the sofa cushion ambiance of your grandfather’s Cadillac. They are firm, supportive and comfortable, with good side bolstering and nice, long thigh support. I have long legs, and for once, I didn’t have to use up all of the driver’s seat travel in order to get room to drive. The front passenger seat similarly has miles of legroom available.

The back seat is another story. Consider it for emergencies only, more suitable for carrying a briefcase than an adult human being. I did contort my body and climb into the back, if only to prove that it could be done. I needed help getting out, even though my contemporaries still consider me to be spry. If you use your second row for passengers on a regular basis, you’ll probably want to look at the CTS Sedan. The Coupe setup results in a trunk with 10.5 cubic feet of capacity, smaller than almost all of its competitors.

A few weeks ago we discussed the new Jetta’s pricing, and everything we learned from Hawaiian Don is correct — the entry-level Jetta S will start at $15,995 ($16,765 with the destination fee), and that price will include a 115 hp 2-liter engine, cloth seats, power windows, mirrors and locks, air conditioning, and electronic stability control.

Alas, there were no S models here in San Fran; the Jettas I drove yesterday were top-of-the-line SEL models with the 170 hp 2.5 liter engine, navigation system, faux-leather interior, keyless entry, four-wheel disc brakes (lower-spec Jettas get rear drums), and an optional sunroof, priced at a more VW-like $23,065 with manual transmission and $24,165 with an automatic. VW says the Jetta TDI turbodiesel will return, as will the 200 hp 2-liter turbo, which will be found in the sporty TDI. And — surprise, surprise! — a hybrid is also on the way for the 2012 model year.

So how did I like the new Jetta? Well… I’m still trying to decide.

In many ways, the 2011 Jetta is a huge improvement over the current car. The back seat is very roomy, the trunk is huge, and the sound from the 5-cylinder motor is better than ever. The new Jetta is eager to be pushed; the motor will happily run wide-open to the redline, the steering is excellent, and the car feels really good in the curves. Inside, the new Jetta has that same easy familiarity I’ve come to expect from Volkswagens, with an excellent driving position and simple, logical controls. And while the Jetta’s schnozz looks disappointingly plain, from other angles it’s a very handsome car.

But the new Jetta has also taken a few steps backwards, most of which have to do with lowering the car’s price point. The new Jetta uses a simpler rear suspension setup than the current Jetta or the new-for-2010 Golf and GTI, and while the handling is good, the ride quality has lost some of that German magic. And the interior feels cheaper than the old car. Granted, the old Jetta was hardly opulent, but the new one uses cheaper materials, including hard plastic in place of the old soft-touch dash, which changes the feel of the cabin. That wouldn’t be as much of a problem for me in a $17,000 Jetta S or a $19,000 Jetta SE, but it just didn’t seem right in the $24,000 Jetta SEL.

Fortunately, my test drive isn’t over. Today, as you read this, VW will be turning me loose in another Jetta, and I’ll have most of the day to wander at will. A few more hours with the Jetta should help me sort out my feelings and opinions — but whether that will be for better or for worse remains to be seen. Look for a full test drive soon.

and here the interior

Test-driving Subaru’s all-wheel-drive Impreza STI is always a bit awkward for me. In the great STI vs. Evo debate, I’ve always been a Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution man. But for 2011, Subaru has implemented a series of changes that almost seem like a custom-tailored effort to win me over. Has it worked? Read on.

• Very fast and very grippy
• Now available with nicer creature comforts
• Surprisingly docile in day-to-day driving

• Expensive
• Doesn’t “wow” like the Lancer Evolution

• Fastest Impreza gets more amenities, sedan body style, and improved ride and handling for 2011
• Price range: $34,720 – $38,070 plus options
• Powertrain: 2.5 liter turbocharged horizontally-opposed 4-cylinder, 305 hp/290 lb-ft, 6-speed manual, all-wheel-drive
• EPA MPG estimates: 17 MPG city/23 MPG highway; premium fuel required
• Best rivals: Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution, Hyundai Genesis coupe, skydiving lessons

Let’s start by charting the changes. Most noticeable is that the STI, previously available only as a hatchback, now comes as a sedan, and at $34,720 (including destination) it’s $1,000 cheaper than last year’s STI hatch. (The 2011 hatchback is $36,720, $1,000 more than 2010.) I generally prefer hatchbacks, but in the case of the Impreza I think the 4-door is the better-looking car. Besides, Subaru says the sedan is more aerodynamic, so it tops out at 158 MPH — 3 MPH faster than the hatch — which means it’ll get you to work faster. The sedan also comes in a new Limited model with leather seats and a sunroof, and all STIs offer an improved navigation system with Bluetooth phone and audio. There are more changes under the skin: Stiffer springs, thicker sway bars, lighter wheels, and new suspension bushings designed to increase handing response without excessive harshness.

So how does it all work? Quite well, actually. The 2011 STI feels noticeably tigher and sharper than last year’s car, and it no longer gives me the uneasy feeling that it’s poised to turn around and bite me in the backside. And yet despite its improved handling, the STI cruises so quietly and comfortably that it’s easy to forget you’re driving Subaru’s penultimate hot-rod.

But are the improvements enough to get me to switch sides? The STI is very fast and very grippy, but it still doesn’t deliver the physics-defying thrills of the Lancer Evolution. Push the STI hard enough to break its prodigious grip and it understeers like a front-wheel-drive car. Where’s the fun in that? No matter how much I fiddled with the user-selectable center differential (which alters power distribution between front and rear axles), I couldn’t feel much change in the STI’s balance. It’s a stark contrast to the Evo, which has a computerized all-wheel-drive system that makes the most inept driver feel like a cross between God and The Stig.

That said, in virtually every other respect, the STI blows the Evo out of the water. Compared to the Subaru, the Mitsubishi’s interior is cheap and crappy, the ride borders on abuse, and the small gas tank means you can only enjoy the Evo in twenty-minute increments. No question, the STI is the more pleasant car to live with — but that said, were I shopping in the 300-hp-all-wheel-drive-screaming-terror class, I’m not sure that “pleasant” would be at the top of my priority list.

Actually, if I was looking for daily thrills, the car I’d look at is the STI’s younger sibling, the 265 hp Impreza WRX, which has also received a round of handling improvements for 2011. The WRX may not be quite as fast as the 305 hp STI, but it’s every bit as enjoyable in the curves and it costs a whopping $8,500 less in sedan form and $10,500 less as a hatchback. If I wasn’t going to punish myself with an Evo, the WRX is the car I’d buy. But that’s just me. If you want the best in speed, handling and grip that Subaru has to offer, that’s the STI — and for 2011, it’s better than ever.

Hyundai has been moving their products steadily upmarket, but they’re getting back to their roots with the 2010 Elantra Blue, the new super-frugal version of Hyundai’s compact sedan. The 2010 Hyundai Elantra Blue is designed to save you money when you buy it (with lower equipment levels than previous Elantras) and when you drive it (with a host of small tweaks designed to improve fuel economy). Does it work? Read on. $14,865 base, $16,565 as tested, EPA fuel economy estimates 26 MPG city, 25 MPG highway.

• Roomy interior
• Good to drive

• Fuel economy isn’t stellar
• Cheap-car feel
• Competitors offer better value-for-money

• “Blue” is the high-value, high-fuel-economy version of Hyundai’s compact Elantra
• Price range (including options): $14,865 – $16,565
• Powertrain: 2.0 liter inline 4, 138 hp/136 lb-ft, 5-speed manual, front-wheel-drive
• EPA MPG estimates: 26 MPG city, 35 MPG highway
• Observed fuel economy: 31.5 MPG
• Best rivals: Kia Forte, Honda Civic, Toyota Corolla

Let me get one thing out of the way: I really do like the Hyundai Elantra. I’m saying that up front because by the end of this review, you might not believe it.

The Elantra is a solid little car. It’s got a roomy back seat (link goes to photo) and trunk, a powerful engine, and it’s enjoyable to drive. And with Hyundai’s long history of providing high-value cars, you’d think their effort to build a low-buck Elantra would be successful.

It isn’t.

Let’s start with fuel economy. The Blue is powered by the same 138 horsepower 2-liter engine as other Elantras, but with taller gearing (which trades acceleration for fuel economy, though not much in either case) and a series of subtle tweaks which, as it turns out, may have been just a bit too subtle.

From the way the Elantra accelerates, you’d never guess this is the high-MPG version. Unfortunately, you’d never guess that from reading the EPA fuel economy estimates, either: 26 MPG city, which is identical to other Elantras, and 35 MPG highway, which is just 1 MPG better. Those figures are identical to the automatic Honda Civic, and the Elantra Blue only comes with a 5-speed stick. I averaged 31.5 MPG, which is good, but not outstanding.

But I had no problem believing this is the cheapest Elantra, because it looks and feels the part. The dashboard materials and switchgear are a mix of very nice and very chintzy, and the suspension clunks worryingly over big bumps.

Problem is, the Elantra Blue really isn’t all that cheap. At $14,865 (including the mandatory destination charge), it’s undercut by the Kia Forte ($14,390) and Kia Soul ($13,995) — both of which get standard electronic stability control (ESC), which the Elantra Blue lacks — as well as the Nissan Cube ($14,740) and Toyota Yaris ($13,365), which get ESC and air conditioning. The Elantra Blue offers A/C, although it only comes bundled with cruise control and a nicer stereo, so the price tag is a hefty $1,700. The Elantra Blue does come standard with power windows, mirrors and locks, but if you want ESC, an automatic transmission, or a color other than white, black, silver or blue, you have to step up to the $17,615 Elantra GLS — and for that kind of money, you might as well buy a Toyota Corolla, a Honda Civic, or a Nissan Sentra.

Let me reiterate: The Hyundai Elantra is a decent little car, but the Blue version is a disappointment. Hyundai is pushing the Elantra Blue as a high-mileage, high-value car, and the mileage and the value simply aren’t there.