A Cars forum. AutoBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AutoBanter forum » Auto makers » Honda
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Volkswagon unveils car that gets 282 miles to the gallon.



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #101  
Old May 29th 07, 08:01 PM posted to alt.autos.toyota,alt.autos.toyota.trucks,rec.autos.makers.honda,alt.autos.honda,sci.energy
bill
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 64
Default Volkswagon unveils car that gets 282 miles to the gallon.

> > you are wrong. if costs are higher for X, then they need to be
> > cut on Y to stay even.

> and if sales are zero, costs are irrelevant.


yes, and to have sales you have to produce a comparable product
at a comparable cost. can't do that when the biggest cost is twice as
expensive for you as the competition.

> > costs for labor are higher

> in europe...


nope, nice juicy eastern european nonunion steel and
manufacturing labor markets. You can pay a union assembly shop, but
not an entire supply chain.

> > for every step of the implementation, so if
> > that's a no-go, then the costs have to be made up in other places.

> but automation slashes costs on everything. the only cost increase is
> that of capital, but it's cheaper to pay interest on machine loans than
> it is to pay salaries.


except that you will have to face a strike, hire tens of
thousands of lawyers and pay court fees and lose market share while
you're not making cars in order to pull it off. nope, cheaper to keep
sliding, you're dead anyway, might as well loot the body.

> > The first cut is materials quality. second is tolerancing because
> > that has a huge effect on costs. third cut is engineering.

> but it loses you customers! don't sales matter?


only if they are at a profit. making up a per unit loss on
volume only kills you faster.

> > you don't
> > have to agree, and frankly, this conversation is tiring. suvs are the
> > fault of the american regulation and the consumer, not the
> > manufacturers,

> eh? so who makes them? japan didn't. japan stood about for years
> wondering if we'd gone insane.


the US manufacturers made them because it was what their
customers wanted. Now they are backing away from them as the market
dries up, just like any competent management team would do.

> > so they are a red herring, the manufacturers were a
> > little slow realizing that the suv day is past, but not badly so.

> not a red herring if 50% of domestic production capacity and the
> majority of domestic revenue generation is derived from them.


thus proving exactly that US auto management is neither myopic
lacking in testicular fortitude, or stupid, they gave the customers
what they wanted, in advance of thecompetition.

> > The fact that the european auto manufacturers are getting stepped
> > on by the asian non-union shops doesn't give you a clue?

>
> but they're not.


yep, they are. european car sales are holding level or dropping
while japanese sales are gaining furiously.

> > the US
> > manufacturers are collapsing first since they have the problem worse
> > than europe, after all, the european unions DID allow the automation
> > to happen. so, the collapse of the US manufacturers is making a hole
> > big enough for the european inefficient unionized plants to tread
> > water while the asians advance by leaps and bounds.

>
> european manufacturers produce product european consumers want.
> /that's/ why they're not collapsing. even american manufacturers in
> europe produce product european consumers want, and profitably. why
> can't american manufacturers in america produce product american
> consumers want? profitably.


because the unions cost too much.

> > it's not the only thing, but it is the biggest thing. also, the
> > union-ess in the us extends to all phases of the supply cycle more
> > than in europe, europe has all the russian imports to draw from,
> > nonunion steel, etc. Detroit doesn't. Okay, I'll grant that
> > management has made some hideous calls, but the unions are the lions
> > share of the issue.

>
> dude, if the product is crap and not selling, there's no amount of
> union-blaming can cover for that.


if the product is crap because the unions are tooexpensive to
allow for the manufacture of a good car at a comparable price then
there is no amount of management blaming that will solve the problem.

> <snip>
> > yep, gotta rob peter if paul is to get paid! non-union
> > manufacturers are eating union shops up wholesale, why is toyota fast
> > becoming the largest manufacturer and ford failing? what is the one
> > fundamental difference between the toyota factory in the midwest and
> > the ford factories in the midwest? UNIONS!!.

>
> how do unions affect sales and market share? frod is failing because
> their product line is crap and not selling, even with massive price
> slashing. there's no amount of union blaming can get in the way of
> frod's poor lineup choice.


gee, perhaps by making a comparable product MORE EXPENSIVE?!?

> > because they DON'T. they have a few areas strangled thusly, and
> > those countries are having economic problems. notice the patterns?
> > the ford plant in europe? NON-UNION!!

> wrong. highly unionized.


nope, non-union plant in russia, makes the entire european focus
line. ford is closing their unionized western european plants.

> > Your background is unclear, however, it's pretty clear that
> > you do have some technical background, and you are seeing the finished
> > product inadequacy. I lay the blame for that in 1 place, you in
> > another. screw it, in the end we're all dead anyway.

>
> it ain't over till it's over. this **** can be turned around if we
> don't give up. and while we're down, stop shooting ourselves in the
> foot by giving our jobs and technology to the chinese. automation will
> cure that problem, but only after management acknowledge their own
> problems and take some initiative rather than simply react and complain.


yup, it can be turned around if people get their heads out of
their asses and figure out that if they keep holding out for
featherbed, unrealistic pensions, no copay medical insurance, and
guaranteed jobs for life, they will have no jobs whatsoever.

Ads
  #102  
Old May 30th 07, 05:57 AM posted to alt.autos.toyota,alt.autos.toyota.trucks,rec.autos.makers.honda,alt.autos.honda,sci.energy
jim beam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,796
Default Volkswagon unveils car that gets 282 miles to the gallon.

bill wrote:
>>> you are wrong. if costs are higher for X, then they need to be
>>> cut on Y to stay even.

>> and if sales are zero, costs are irrelevant.

>
> yes, and to have sales you have to produce a comparable product
> at a comparable cost. can't do that when the biggest cost is twice as
> expensive for you as the competition.


and if sales are zero, it doesn't matter what your expenses are - you'll
make no money.

>
>>> costs for labor are higher

>> in europe...

>
> nope, nice juicy eastern european nonunion steel and
> manufacturing labor markets. You can pay a union assembly shop, but
> not an entire supply chain.


eh? steel is a global commodity. it's traded on global markets. it
costs less than $700 a ton dockside u.s.a. it's the steelmaker's
problem if they can't produce it at a competitive price, not the car
maker's.

>
>>> for every step of the implementation, so if
>>> that's a no-go, then the costs have to be made up in other places.

>> but automation slashes costs on everything. the only cost increase is
>> that of capital, but it's cheaper to pay interest on machine loans than
>> it is to pay salaries.

>
> except that you will have to face a strike, hire tens of
> thousands of lawyers and pay court fees and lose market share while
> you're not making cars in order to pull it off. nope, cheaper to keep
> sliding, you're dead anyway, might as well loot the body.


<snip>

ok, this is the point at which i belatedly realize that you're simply
not here for discussion - there's not a shred of rationality or reality
in what you just said.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
2006 Vue. 12 miles per gallon? [email protected] Saturn 8 February 8th 07 05:26 AM
Rated miles per gallon is total BS! TOM KAN PA Chrysler 40 April 23rd 05 04:39 PM
miles/gallon guage? William R. Watt Technology 31 January 25th 05 08:03 PM
Gas miles per gallon Michael VW water cooled 19 October 13th 04 03:56 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:48 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AutoBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.