Consider buying American!

On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 02:04:30 -0000, "R. Mark Clayton"
> waffled on about something:

>
>"still just me" > wrote in message
.. .
>> On Tue, 12 Feb 2008 23:38:26 +0000 (GMT), "Dave Plowman (News)"
>> > wrote:
>>
>>
>>>> When American auto makers start turning out a quality product at
>>>> a competitive price I'll take a look at them.
>>
>> Geez, I some people want everything. Just buy American, fill it with
>> $40b Exxon gas, and stop ur whining! Don't you understand that there
>> are CEO salaries at stake here?
>>
>> On a lighter note, when GM Management gets a friggin clue they might
>> be able to make some money. Don't expect it in the foreseeable future.
>> They've only made it this far due to inertia.
>>
>>>Thing I've never understood is why the American cars we get in the UK - at
>>>a far higher price than in the US - have such very poor interiors. Cheap
>>>plastics etc. After all UK (Euro) Fords and Vauxhalls are ok.
>>
>> I though Vauxhall was a GM brand now (?)
>
>Yes that's the odd thing - Ford and GM actually make some quite good cars in
>Europe these days, and to be fair many EU marques had horrifying reputations
>a generation ago: -
>
>Citroen - over complex, unrepairable.
>Fiat - rust
>BL - everything
>Skoda - "the worst new cars sold in Britain - Car Magazine"
>etc.

Errrrr... Have you ever fiddled with a Citroen C6? Some things haven't
changed!

D0d6y.
--
MUSHROOMS ARE THE OPIATE OF THE MOOSES

Dave Plowman (News) > wrote:
>
>It's not possible for a country like the US to compete *at all* in the
>world wide economy if you think the workforce wage cost is the only
>important factor. You simply couldn't pay anyone as little as a Chinese
>labourer as they couldn't even afford to buy food at US prices. Or
>accommodation. Etc.

It's hell at the bottom of the market. You don't want to be competing
solely on price, because no matter how cheap and lousy you can make a
product, someone else can make it worse for less.

The only way American companies (and Europeans companies for that matter)
can compete in a global market is on quality. You have to be able to sell
a better product.

For the most part, the American car manufacturers are falling down on the
job when it comes to selling a better product. That's not because of the
workers, but they're the ones that are having to deal with the consequences.

>Thing I've never understood is why the American cars we get in the UK - at
>a far higher price than in the US - have such very poor interiors. Cheap
>plastics etc. After all UK (Euro) Fords and Vauxhalls are ok.

Because that's what Americans are willing to accept, so that's what the
manufacturers give us. But then, I miss British cars with wooden dashboards.... --scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

On Feb 13, 11:46*am, wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Feb 2008 23:28:27 -0800 (PST), wrote:
> >The truth is that the "Big Three" have no integrity, no characters and
> >had not produced anything good enough to hold on to. Why would you
> >hold on to them?
>
> All cars are simply transportation and when they wear out you throw
> them away. The japs forced the Americans to improve the quality of the
> cars but in that effort they all became clones and you really have a
> hard time telling any of them apart.

I beg to differ. Some people like to buy cars (as opossed as renting/
leasing) and maintain them properly to get their money's worth. And
one would expect that after spending one's hard earned money it would
work every time. Same goes for computers or any other product, for
that matter.

If Japanese cars offer a trouble-free experience for the consumer,
it's no wonder people prefer them. As per clones, I have a hard time
digesting the Saturn Ion, Chevrolet Impala or Dogde Magnum designs and
can't find anything similar, thank goodness.

I read that a Chrysler CEO physically covered his ears when a chief
engineer brought up quality issues with some parts. A mechanic told me
he was getting recall notices for his Ford Focus for simple things
they should have realized before rolling the car out. According to
him, their idea was to sell the car and fix the problems, if any,
later.

Scott Dorsey wrote:
> It is less and less applicable these days, as Japanese car makers are
> falling into the same traps that destroyed American car makers and are
> increasingly becoming concerned with short term profits rather than the
> end product. It is very disturbing. There are an increasing number of
> MBAs running Japanese car companies, and that's a bad sign.
> --scott

Yeah, I'm afraid you're right, looking at some of the new stuff from
Honda and Toyota. Maybe it's the Korean's turn...or the Chinese...

Jeff wrote:
> Moe wrote:
> <...>
>> You can buy detroit iron and pay for present and past autoworkers high
>> pay, pension and health care, or you can buy "import" and be able to
>> pay for your own health care and provide for your own pension. Same
>> as shopping at wal-mart.
>
> Shopping at Wal-Mart is a different story. Wal-Mart has some really bad
> employee practices, like not paying workers when they work through their
> breaks and a history of locking in workers at night. They are very
> anti-union as well.
>
> Wal-Mart does predatory pricing on the things they buy. This forces the
> suppliers to cut costs drastically. And on some products, the quality
> really suffers. Plus, the only way some makers can make the products at
> the prices that Wal-Mart demands is to send work out of the country.
>
> I don't shop there.

Same here, once I learned of their Draconian policies toward their
workers I won't shop there for anything.

on 2/12/2008 6:33 PM Jeff said the following:
> Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
>> In article <uyosj.32$dh.21@trnddc01>, Jeff >
>> wrote:
>>
>>>> Does he buy GM or Ford or Chrysler, with a track record that would
>>>> make a Russian tractory factory blush from embarassment? Or does
>>>> he buy a Japanese nameplate--where, to be sure, one could get a bad
>>>> car, but the odds are so incredibly against that?
>>> The old track record for the Michigan 3 isn't so good. But the track
>>> record for the more recent cars is good.
>>
>> But it's not NEARLY enough of a track record compared to the Japanese
>> nameplates--not nearly enough for Joe Sixpack to throw his hard
>> earned $25,000.
>
> Funny, the only carmaker to have increased sales last month was GM.
>
> I guess you don't know Joe.
>
> Jeff

Maybe for the last month, but how about the whole previous year?
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5h...lCw6AD8UOVK4G1
http://tinyurl.com/33xdmz

--

Bill
In Hamptonburgh, NY
To email, remove the double zeroes after @

"Jeff" > wrote in message
news:fmhsj.6463$Wr4.5418@trnddc05...

>>Consider buying an American
> > car.

I did before I bought my BMW but American cars are not very good.

still just me wrote:

>On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 11:10:53 -0800 (PST), PCman
> wrote:
>
>
>
>>I read that a Chrysler CEO physically covered his ears when a chief
>>engineer brought up quality issues with some parts. A mechanic told me
>>he was getting recall notices for his Ford Focus for simple things
>>they should have realized before rolling the car out. According to
>>him, their idea was to sell the car and fix the problems, if any,
>>later.
>>
>>
>
>Kind of like Microsoft.
>
>
Ya! Just for giggles, several years ago I wrote to Gates suggesting
that it
was the perfect time for Microsoft to get into the car business. He could
do the Microsoft thing and the Intel thing all in one shot.

I suggested that he devise an operating system for electric cars and
come up
with a data bus (like the PCI in PCs), power bus, and operating system.
But
he passed. Passing on ideas like this, he's never gonna make it business

Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
> In article <2vCsj.169$sh.40@trnddc07>, Jeff >
> wrote:
>
>> Moe wrote:
>> <...>
>>> You can buy detroit iron and pay for present and past autoworkers high
>>> pay, pension and health care, or you can buy "import" and be able to
>>> pay for your own health care and provide for your own pension. Same as
>>> shopping at wal-mart.
>> Shopping at Wal-Mart is a different story. Wal-Mart has some really bad
>> employee practices, like not paying workers when they work through their
>> breaks and a history of locking in workers at night. They are very
>> anti-union as well.
>>
>> Wal-Mart does predatory pricing on the things they buy. This forces the
>> suppliers to cut costs drastically. And on some products, the quality
>> really suffers. Plus, the only way some makers can make the products at
>> the prices that Wal-Mart demands is to send work out of the country.
>>
>> I don't shop there.
>>
>> Jeff
>
> Hey, Jeff:
>
> http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ne...nG=Search+News
>
> "GM lost $US722 million in the December quarter and a record $US38.7
> billion for 2007"
>
> Tell us again the bedtime story about how GM was the only automaker
> whose sales improved last month.

<http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/02/business/02auto.html?_r=1&ref=business&oref=slogin>

You can read it yourself.

Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
> In article >,
> "Dave Plowman (News)" > wrote:
>
>>> "GM lost $US722 million in the December quarter and a record $US38.7
>>> billion for 2007"
>>> Tell us again the bedtime story about how GM was the only automaker
>>> whose sales improved last month.
>> Nothing unusual about improved sales *and* reduced profits.
>
> No, nothing at all.
>
> But in Jeff's world, the improved sales last month means GM is the
> leader in automakers.

No it doesn't. It means that GM makes at least some vehicles that people
like. Or offers better incentives.

Jeff