longeyes
member
By "adjust" I meant prosper, I meant be America.
I don't believe that this country will permit itself to sink into second-tier status. I think we will go to war first to preserve our advantages.
Delphi's bankruptcy ominous sign for fading auto industry
- Thread starter NCP24
- Start date
- Status
By "adjust" I meant prosper, I meant be America.
I don't believe that this country will permit itself to sink into second-tier status. I think we will go to war first to preserve our advantages.
cracked butt
Member
Sort of like Germany in the 1940s?
Monkeyleg
Member.
"Sort of like Germany in the 1940s?"
Well, that doesn't seem to be working in our wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, does it?
The prosperity we saw in the 1990's had nothing to do with Bill Clinton, but rather with Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, and other leaders in technology.
We'll see further breakthroughs in technology here in the US. The problem is keeping countries like Japan, Korea, China and others from just stealing it and undercutting us on price.
Well, that doesn't seem to be working in our wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, does it?
The prosperity we saw in the 1990's had nothing to do with Bill Clinton, but rather with Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, and other leaders in technology.
We'll see further breakthroughs in technology here in the US. The problem is keeping countries like Japan, Korea, China and others from just stealing it and undercutting us on price.
longeyes
member
And you can thank the same guys for the Great Leveling that is taking place. American technology is eliminating jobs here--aka higher productivity--and empowering foreign workers in developing nations (especially in Asia). I'm not saying this is "bad," just part of the process.
Rampant theft of technology is one of the factors I'm talking about when I say war is a possibility--I'm not advocating it, mind, just remarking on human behavior--to maintain our standard of living. We've been paying the defense bill for most of the Western world for decades--one of these days it may strike people at home that we ought to collect the bill.
Germany in the '40s...? You said it, not I...
Monkeyleg
Member.
"And you can thank the same guys for the Great Leveling that is taking place. American technology is eliminating jobs here--aka higher productivity--and empowering foreign workers in developing nations (especially in Asia). I'm not saying this is "bad," just part of the process."
Technological advancement isn't something you can just stop when you feel that your station in life is hunky-dorey. Those that adapt survive, although adaptation isn't always easy.
And, you're right, all of this is part of the process. If I owned a company that produced a labor-intensive product, I'd certainly look for somewhere to get cheap labor. That's why Saturn built their automotive plant in Spring Green, KY back in 1988 or so instead of Kenosha, WI. Our taxes and wages here are far higher than in KY.
A conventional war isn't necessary, nor desirable. The Chinese own enough of our bonds to be able to bring our economy to its knees with a massive selloff.
The US has always succeeded by being ahead of the game, whether it was being the first to mass-produce automobiles or being the pioneer in chip technology.
I don't know what the next technological revolution will be--if I did, I'd be investing in it now--but we'd better find it and right quick.
Technological advancement isn't something you can just stop when you feel that your station in life is hunky-dorey. Those that adapt survive, although adaptation isn't always easy.
And, you're right, all of this is part of the process. If I owned a company that produced a labor-intensive product, I'd certainly look for somewhere to get cheap labor. That's why Saturn built their automotive plant in Spring Green, KY back in 1988 or so instead of Kenosha, WI. Our taxes and wages here are far higher than in KY.
A conventional war isn't necessary, nor desirable. The Chinese own enough of our bonds to be able to bring our economy to its knees with a massive selloff.
The US has always succeeded by being ahead of the game, whether it was being the first to mass-produce automobiles or being the pioneer in chip technology.
I don't know what the next technological revolution will be--if I did, I'd be investing in it now--but we'd better find it and right quick.
Waitone
Member
Actually, the gameplan is to level the standards of living. It would be accomplished via raising the standard of living of those at the bottom of the ladder and lowering the standard of living for those at the top of the ladder. Problem is how do you define the top of the ladder. If you look carefully at what is happening here in the USofA you will see a lowering of the standard of living of the middle class. Whether or not it is good or advisable is not the issue for now. What is of paramount importance in the near future is the standard of living is being reduced without a corresponding drop in the cost of government. We temporarily have a high standard of living because of debt. At some point total debt will become too high for creditors and the party will suddenly end. This goes for personal debt and national debt.
macavada
Member
Here's an example of what I was alluding to in my previous post.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051013/ap_on_bi_ge/prius_recall;_ylt=AhTWy4Wt9hSABOQ6ntkUvYOs0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA3ODdxdHBhBHNlYwM5NjQ
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051013/ap_on_bi_ge/prius_recall;_ylt=AhTWy4Wt9hSABOQ6ntkUvYOs0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA3ODdxdHBhBHNlYwM5NjQ
Bingo ART!! You nailed it. Ford Motor sells ALL of its small cars at a loss simply to meet CAFE standards.
ESCORT =LOSS
Focus =LOSS
Fusion =miniscule Profit (Put together in Mexico)
As far as seeing nothing wrong with $65 an hour? Those folks aren't working over a line....They're mowing lawns, sweeping floors, moving boxes, just about anything they want or choose to do. Otherwise they'll file a grievance against you and get paid even more for something they "should" have done. I was written up for carrying a pocket screw driver onto a plant floor. The union was paid a days electrician wages for this "infraction".
Come on, what freaking planet do you live on? Salaried employees DO NOT make that much cash AND they work overtime for NOTHING. You obviously work for a union and are being fed the line by the guys ripping you off. Lets talk about what the folks make who run the unions and how corrupt they are.......
Overtime eh? The company is forced to make them work overtime because they can't afford to hire new employees when you fully load those wages with benefits and consider the future costs of pension benefits and healthcare costs for all the retired workers.
The UAW is out of control and they're starting to realize it.
Oh, and you folks had better hope neither of the domestics goes out of business. The ripple effect in the entire economy will put a lot of YOU out of jobs.
Keep on buying those imports.
stevelyn
Member
shoudek said:
I bet they are all courted by the Democratic Party and vote Democrat, who in turn take away your gun rights.
Having grown up in the coal fields of WV, I have absolutely nothing good to say about unions. I watched the United Mine Workers strike themselves out jobs and plunging an entire state into a depression. A depression they are just now starting to recover from.
At one time, unions were a necessary evil as that was the only way to improve working conditions. Modern labor laws protect workers from the hazards that the union fought against.
Today unions are criminally, corrupt parasites that destroy their hosts then blame overseas manufacturers for their troubles. I hope they all go Tango Uniform. Only then can a free market make the necessary adjustments between wages and costs of living.
71Commander
Member
WOW!!! Talk about a BS statement. First off I would say you got caught USING the screwdriver. The "written up for carrying" line is just ridiculus. It could never happen.
Secondly, the union gets paid nothing. The person whose job you tried to do while just "carrying"(wink, wink) the screwdriver is the one who got the money.
Joejojoba111
Member
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2005
- Messages
- 1,056
"Add in overtime and this guy who can barely read and write is pulling down over $70K/year. That's just WRONG!"
I don't think it's wrong in any aspect, moral, legal, injurious, nope nothing wrong. Maybe you're mistaking 'wrongful' with 'envious'.
A big problem with Democracy is that the majority can abuse it's power to drag down those who succeed. Paying taxes is one thing, but considering it wrong that someone has a better-paying job, that's not wrong.
Here's a quick heads-up - a few deacdes ago your dumb blue-collar worker used to be able to support an entire family and own everything outright. And that illiterate man you speak of, he has probably stuck with that company, climbed his way slowly up the ladder. He probably has extensive knowledge of all sorts of operations under him.
And if he had to describe what you do, I bet he could make it sound just as moronic. Sometimes responsibility is easy to ignore when you try to describe things.
"Good. The free market demands that you pay people what they are worth. When you have artificial constraints like union demands it throws everything off."
Lol, you think that the only constraint is unions? you are incorrect. You can easily understand this when you consider the origin of the act of unionizing. And consider who made it so difficult to do, how, and why. Clearly, the person who pays you has a tiny bit of influence in how you are paid.
I don't think it's wrong in any aspect, moral, legal, injurious, nope nothing wrong. Maybe you're mistaking 'wrongful' with 'envious'.
A big problem with Democracy is that the majority can abuse it's power to drag down those who succeed. Paying taxes is one thing, but considering it wrong that someone has a better-paying job, that's not wrong.
Here's a quick heads-up - a few deacdes ago your dumb blue-collar worker used to be able to support an entire family and own everything outright. And that illiterate man you speak of, he has probably stuck with that company, climbed his way slowly up the ladder. He probably has extensive knowledge of all sorts of operations under him.
And if he had to describe what you do, I bet he could make it sound just as moronic. Sometimes responsibility is easy to ignore when you try to describe things.
"Good. The free market demands that you pay people what they are worth. When you have artificial constraints like union demands it throws everything off."
Lol, you think that the only constraint is unions? you are incorrect. You can easily understand this when you consider the origin of the act of unionizing. And consider who made it so difficult to do, how, and why. Clearly, the person who pays you has a tiny bit of influence in how you are paid.
benEzra
Moderator Emeritus
The thing is, high-wage societies CAN compete with lower-wage societies, IF they produce superior products. Which company has higher average wages, Kia or BMW? Yet BMW is doing fine.
Toyota, Honda, Hyundai, etc. are BUILDING automobile factories in the U.S. and HIRING workers. What are they doing differently? There is a big part of your answer. If GM and Ford started building decent cars, and hadn't dug themselves into paying a button-pusher twice the salary of a nuclear engineer, they'd be fine, globalization or not.
Quality issues have been part of the problem, but IMHO only a small part. I currently drive an '87 Camry that has 231,000 miles on it, and it still runs great. It replaced an '87 Chrysler 5th Avenue that ran like crap after only 80,000 miles, and had massive electrical failures after 100,000. My parents drive an AMERICAN MADE '93 Camry with 210,000 miles on it. Still looks and runs great. My in-laws drive a late-model Ford Contour that is on its last legs with just over 100,000 miles on the clock. J.D. Power says the newest GM's/Fords/Chryslers are much better built, but that's not going to save Ford/GM if they don't start producing better designs.
A big part of the problem is that GM and Ford are only making a few truly competetive products (Chrysler finally seems to be "getting it" a little). The only GM cars that I'd really love to have are Cadillacs (CTS, SLS, or STS) which are fantastic cars but WAY out of my price range thanks to GM's cost structure. (I'd love to have a 'Vette, too, but that's a bit high-profile, WAY out of my reach, and only a 2-seater.) I rented 2003 Chevy Malibu/Lumina/Impala/whatever a while back and it was put together OK, but just a boring design. Give me a more spirited engine, a 5-speed manual, more grip, and less understeer (and ixnay on the blinding high-beam DRL's that you can't turn off), and I might consider it. But in its present form, no way. If someone gave me one, I'd be looking to trade it.
GM has made lots of cars I've lusted after over the years, but the bean-counters always pigeonhole them as "special limited editions" unavailable to we unwashed masses. If the regular Caprice had the styling, fit, and finish of the Impala SS (the V8, rear-drive one) and had that V8 as an engine option, do you think it might have done a little better than the underpowered upside-down bathtub that was the "regular" Caprice? If GM had offered the 3.8 liter turbo as an option for ALL RWD Buick Regals, instead of pigeonholing it in the overpriced Grand National, and upgraded the chassis/suspension to European standards, you think it might have done a little better?
I think GM also handicaps their cars due to their excessive concern over "branding." Pontiac is supposed to be the "performance division," so Chevys can't be too passionate, and apparently can't have manual transmissions if it's bigger than a Cobalt. Cadillac is supposed to be the "luxury division" (and they are indeed good), but that means Chevy's can't be too refined. And since Pontiac is the "excitement division", its cars have to be adolescent-looking; lots of red paint, hulking body cladding, and cheap materials. And mandated corporate "styling cues" hurt styling overall; the Pontiac GTO (potentially a very good car) has to look like an '89 Grand Am or else somebody might not realize it's a Pontiac... Meanwhile, Toyota makes the Corolla and Camry just as good as they possibly can, no holds barred, styles them as they see fit, and if they get good enough to step on Lexus's toes, they'll just have to upgrade the Lexuses...and you don't see Honda handicapping the Civic and Accord because they're scared people might think they're Acuras...
Ford's new Mustang is very appealing (even with a V6), but too much interior noise and only two doors. The Taurus...I used to like Tauruses, before the bean-counters destroyed them. If the Shogun V-6 and 5-speed were still an engine option, I might consider a Taurus (though the styling sucks). The Five Hundred isn't bad, but that's because the chassis is a VOLVO, and 0-60 performance is just slightly better than a front-end loader. At least Volvos are available with performance engines and manual transmissions.
Personally, I think "family" Fords and Chevy's must either be designed by liability lawyers, or by guys who always drive 52 mph in the left lane with their turn signal on. Who says family cars have to be so #@$%! BORING??
I'd love to buy a new car in the next couple of years to replace my Camry. My wish-list criteria are 4 doors, excellent handling, manual transmission, 0-60 under 7 seconds, 30+ mpg highway, refined interior and exterior, good looks, good safety features, and less than $30K. Are there any GM cars that can compete with the new Volvo S40 T5? Not that I've seen...DESPITE high labor costs in Sweden and Belgium (not to mention shipping costs), the Volvo is just a better car all around, and looks better to boot. I look at GM's offerings in that size range, and I see the Saturn Ion (cheaply made, decent engine but unrefined), the Chevy Cobalt (ditto), and the Cadillac CTS (fantastic car but out of my price range, probably due to GM's cost structure).
And Ford? The S40 shares the same platform as the European Ford Focus, as I understand it, but Ford isn't selling that car in the U.S., and if they did the "Americanized" version would probably be filled with cheap gray plastic, severely underpowered, and handle like a waterbed. Sheesh, Ford owns Volvo; why can't they make a small sedan as good as an S40?
Last edited:
benEzra
Moderator Emeritus
My point is, Germany and Japan are high-wage countries, yet their quality and efficiency are such that the price difference is not enough to undercut the higher quality.
If your choice is between cheaply made Korean products and high-quality U.S. products, there is still a strong business case for buying the U.S. product despite the higher price, especially when you factor in shipping costs. But if the Korean product is pretty good and the U.S. product is mediocre, then outsourcing gets tempting. And if bad management, union greed, and silly turf wars (machinists aren't allowed to drive themselves, Teamsters aren't allowed to enter the factory, button pusher gets twice the salary of a nuclear engineer) raise the cost of the U.S. product enough, the quality-for-the-money quotient begins to look very unfavorable.
The outsourcing of electronics to Japanese suppliers in the '70's and early '80's wasn't done because the Japanese products were so much cheaper at that time, but because the American suppliers got complacent and stopped striving for quality and true efficiency. For example, the switchover to Japanese memory chips finally occurred when a major computer OEM did some tests and found that the best U.S.-made memory chips had three times the failure rate of the worst Japanese producer. So they outsourced.
As I mentioned before, Toyota, Hyundai, and Honda are building vehicles IN THE UNITED STATES and spanking GM and Ford. The differences are manufacturing efficiency (U.S.-made Toyotas are far cheaper to build than U.S.-made Chevrolets, largely due to bad management/labor decisions on GM's part) and quality/desirability of the product, as I pointed out above (Chevrolet sedans would have been very competitive ten years ago, but come across as boring and obsolete now). And even if perfectly built with perfect parts, the current Chevy Malibu is still a boring, underperforming, and undesirable design.
And to use the Volvo example, the S40 T5 is built in a high-wage, high-overhead, high-tax country and has to be SHIPPED here (big $$$), and it is still more car for the money than you can get from GM and Ford. The problem isn't U.S. wages vs. Third World wages, it's GM and Ford product design and cost structure decisions versus those of the other companies that are kicking their butts.
Exactly and once upon a time the BIG 3M produced a quality American made vehicle.
I was thinking more on the lines of steel and coke, but yea during the '80's the American Government/ large business thought it was time to start outsourcing manufacturing jobs to low-wage countries.
Agreed, they should have never sacrificed quality for quantity produced my cheap third world labor. Once upon a time THE BIG 3M produced a quality American made vehicle, not anymore. By the way, where are the individual components made for the American made “Toyota, Hyundai, and Honda”?
Respectfully disagree, the decision to go postindustrial - globalization was made years ago, just as our current immigration laws were. It all boils down to profit and cheap labor.
Art Eatman
Moderator In Memoriam
The cost/wage/outsource thing is nothing new. In 1962, at Dearborn, Michigan, steel from Sweden cost less than steel from Pittsburgh.
One major problem in talking about cars is comparing apples and oranges. Toyota and Nissan are the only proper comparisons against the "Big Three". All are set up for mass production.
Saab, Volvo, Mercedes, BMW, etc. are limited production cars, in terms of numbers per year. Any limited production item can be made to higher standards of quality. Toyota has solved the puzzle of mixing high output with high quality. GM, by and large, hasn't or can't.
But, same for guns, to some extent. Think Purdey...
I recall a Chevy engineer commenting, "Any fool can design a water pump for a Rolls-Royce. You gotta be pretty sharp to design one that will sell for $13.00, exchange." (1962 dollars.)
Social systems evolve over time, and they commonly resist change when times change. Unions are one example. In the Army, consider the "West Point Protective Association". Heck, consider the mechanics of voting! People in general resist change, for the physical and emotional discomfort that naturally ensues. The next step is the blame game. This gets us to, "If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem."
For us, then, unions are but a part of the problem. Outsourcing is but a part of the problem. Same for debt or for spoiled-brat lifestyles in changing times...
As usual, the enemy is us.
, Art
One major problem in talking about cars is comparing apples and oranges. Toyota and Nissan are the only proper comparisons against the "Big Three". All are set up for mass production.
Saab, Volvo, Mercedes, BMW, etc. are limited production cars, in terms of numbers per year. Any limited production item can be made to higher standards of quality. Toyota has solved the puzzle of mixing high output with high quality. GM, by and large, hasn't or can't.
But, same for guns, to some extent. Think Purdey...
I recall a Chevy engineer commenting, "Any fool can design a water pump for a Rolls-Royce. You gotta be pretty sharp to design one that will sell for $13.00, exchange." (1962 dollars.)
Social systems evolve over time, and they commonly resist change when times change. Unions are one example. In the Army, consider the "West Point Protective Association". Heck, consider the mechanics of voting! People in general resist change, for the physical and emotional discomfort that naturally ensues. The next step is the blame game. This gets us to, "If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem."
For us, then, unions are but a part of the problem. Outsourcing is but a part of the problem. Same for debt or for spoiled-brat lifestyles in changing times...
As usual, the enemy is us.
, Art71Commander
Member
I disagree with this. The Domestic auto companies have made a big gain on the imports in regards to quality improvments, but the American manufacturers have a stigma about quality relating to their cars of the 80's to overcome.
http://www.detnews.com/2005/autosinsider/0506/30/B01-232784.htm
Big 3 quality gains on rivals
Overall industry: Reliability up, but some upscale brands lag
By Ed Garsten / The Detroit News
Top models in key segments
Compact car: Chevrolet Prizm
Entry midsize car: Chevrolet Malibu
Premium midsize car: Buick Century
Full-size car: Buick LeSabre
Entry luxury car: Ford Thunderbird
Midsize luxury car: Lincoln Town Car
Premium luxury car: Lexus LS 430
Sports car: Mazda Miata
Premium sports car: Porsche 911
Midsize pickup: Chevrolet S-10 pickup
Full-size pickup: Cadillac Escalade EXT
Entry SUV: Honda CR-V
Midsize SUV: Toyota 4Runner
Full-size SUV: GMC Yukon/Yukon XL
Entry luxury SUV: Lexus RX 300
Premium luxury SUV: Lexus LX 470
Minivan: Ford Windstar
Source: J.D. Power and Associates
Brand rankings
J.D. Power and Associates on Wednesday released its annual survey of vehicle dependability based on questionnaires sent to owners of 2002 model year vehicles. The list ranks vehicle brands by the problems their owners reported per 100 vehicles.
Brand Problems per 100 vehicles
Lexus 139
Porsche 149
Lincoln 151
Buick 163
Cadillac 175
Infiniti 178
Toyota 194
Mercury 195
Honda 201
Acura 203
BMW 225
Ford 231
Chevrolet 232
Chrysler 235
INDUSTRY AVERAGE 237
Saturn 240
Oldsmobile 242
GMC 245
Pontiac 245
Mazda 252
Hyundai 260
Subaru 260
Volvo 266
Jaguar 268
Dodge 273
Nissan 275
Mitsubishi 278
Mercedes-Benz 283
Saab 286
Jeep 289
Suzuki 292
Audi 312
Daewoo 318
Isuzu 331
Volkswagen 335
Mini 383
Land Rover 395
Kia 397
Source: J.D. Power and Associates.
Related report
J.D. Power press release, top 3 rankings in each vehicle category
Comment on this story
Send this story to a friend
Get Home Delivery
Detroit's automakers are making major gains in long-term vehicle durability with General Motors Corp. and Ford Motor Co. finishing best in a record number of product segments and closing the gap with foreign rivals, according to an industry study released Wednesday.
Almost every automaker made significant strides in J.D. Power and Associates' Vehicle Dependability Study released Wednesday. The industry average improved 12 percent to 2.4 problems per vehicle, from 2.7 problems a year ago, according to the survey, which tracked problems reported by 50,635 original owners of 2002 model year cars and trucks.
The gains by Detroit's automakers show that recent quality improvement efforts are starting to bear fruit. U.S. automakers took the top spot in 12 of 19 vehicle segments, compared with 7 of 17 product categories a year ago.
Toyota Motor Co.'s Lexus division -- with about 1.4 problems per vehicle -- was the highest scoring brand for the 11th consecutive year. But other upscale brands -- Volvo, Mercedes-Benz, Audi, Jaguar and Land Rover -- continue to struggle and score below the industry average.
Long-term quality and reliability are crucial to generating loyal customers and lowering warranty costs for all automakers. J.D. Power said 84 percent of all 2002 models surveyed showed year-over-year improvements in reliability after three years of ownership. And the difference between the top-ranked brand -- Lexus, with 1.39 problems per 2002 model -- and the worst brand -- Kia, with 3.97 problems per model -- narrowed by nearly 17 percent, the company said.
Consumers were polled on 147 attributes and the study found improvements in 74 areas.
"The most improvement came in ride, handling, braking, engine and interior," said Neal Oddes, director of product research and analysis at J.D. Power, referring to the overall industry improvement.
Wind noise, a perennial bugaboo of consumers, was the top complaint, followed by noisy brakes, uneven tire wear, excessive brake dust and vibrating brakes.
For GM, which has struggled to convince consumers its quality problems are behind it, despite gains in initial and long-term quality studies over the past few years, the results are especially heartening.
"Customer perception has lagged reality," said Annette Clayton, GM North America vice president of quality.
"The results are proof of what we've been saying all along, that our quality is good and has improved."
GM models finished on top in eight segments, and the automaker placed 18 vehicles in the top three of the segments surveyed -- the most by any manufacturer.
Winners included the Cadillac Escalade EXT in the light-duty, full-size pickup segment; the Chevrolet Silverado in the heavy-duty, full-size pickup segment; and the Buick Century among premium midsize cars. Chevrolet won in four segments, and was among the brands scoring better than the industry average with 2.3 problems per vehicle, compared to 2.6 in last year's study.
GM's Buick brand placed fourth behind Lexus, Porsche and Ford's Lincoln brand. The only GM brand that lost ground was Saab, with 2.9 problems per vehicle, compared with 2.6 problems per model last year.
Ford, which also is trying to improve quality, had the top vehicles in four segments -- including the Ford Windstar in the minivan segment and the Lincoln Town Car in the mid-luxury car segment.
Ford, Lincoln and Mercury each scored better than the industry average, while Ford's foreign nameplates, such as Jaguar and Land Rover, fell below the benchmark.
Lincoln owners reported 1.5 problems per vehicle, while Mercury owners reported 1.9 problems, and Ford customers reported 2.3 problems per model.
"What we will do is continue to fix and uncover (problems) until we are consistently placed as a leader among all manufacturers," said Deborah Coleman, Ford vice president of global quality.
Toyota, long the company setting the quality benchmark, won in four segments.
Customers reported 1.9 problems per Toyota model, compared with 2.2 in last year's study. At Lexus, owners reported 1.4 problems per vehicle, an improvement over 1.6 problems last year.
DaimlerChrysler AG's Chrysler, Dodge and Jeep brands all improved, with Chrysler scoring just above the industry average with 2.3 problems per vehicle. The Dodge Ram van, now discontinued, and Jeep Liberty were among the top three models in their segments.
The positive showing for Detroit automakers comes at a time when Asian brands, perceived by consumers to produce better quality vehicles, are gaining market share in the United States.
Detroit automakers have seen their grip on the U.S. market slip to 57.4 percent this year from 59.2 percent last year, while Asian automakers have increased their U.S. market share to 36.5 percent from 34.3 percent.
J.D. Powers's Oddes says domestic brands have closed the quality gap in both initial and long-term quality by shoring up design and manufacturing processes, and by listening more closely to consumer feedback.
"Those manufacturers take that information and they design, right at the beginning of a products' lifecycle, not only for short-term quality, but we see that now translating into long-term durability," Oddes said.
GM's Clayton contends there is no difference in quality between the automaker's product lineup and Asian models, saying "the gap is closed."
While still falling below the industry average at 2.6 problems per vehicle, South Korean automaker Hyundai Motor Co. showed the biggest improvement of any brand. In last year's study, Hyundai customers reported 3.8 problems per vehicle.
On a percentage basis, the German Porsche brand, which came in second to Lexus, was the most improved with just 1.5 problems reported per vehicle compared with 2.4 last year.
At the bottom of the list was Kia, with 3.97 problems per vehicle, and Land Rover, with 3.95.
Gains in long-term durability not only improve customer satisfaction, along with vehicle and brand image, it can bolster a vehicle's value.
Data gathered by the Power Information Network, a division of J.D. Power, found that vehicles performing above the industry average in the dependability study typically retain $1,000 more of their value than brands falling below the benchmark.
You can reach Ed Garsten at (313) 223-3217 or [email protected].
benEzra
Moderator Emeritus
Many are made locally (e.g., in the U.S.). I recall when the Hyundai plant went into Alabama, a lot of parts suppliers also went up.
The Toyota Camry now has most of its parts manufactured here in the States, IIRC, unlike the Ford Crown Victoria...
I agree with TennTucker. Detroit's problem today is with obsolete/substandard designs and bad cost structures that encourage same, not so much build quality per se.
The problem as I see it is that Ford and GM both think "family sedan" equates to B-O-R-I-N-G. Lackluster power, poor handling, acres of dull plastic, automatic transmissions only, ho-hum styling, ad nauseaum. Cadillac is doing it right (though they're pricey!), and Chrysler is getting it, too (compare the Charger with the Malibu...). Chevrolet and Ford are not.
The Taurus SHO was once compared to BMW's...the current Taurus invites comparison to Checker cabs, regardless of how good the build quality may be.
longeyes
member
These issues are complex. The word "dumping" mean anything to you? "Closed markets?" How about foreign government subsidizing their own companies to compete with us? Japan, Inc.? Technology theft? Technology buy-outs? Remember Ampex? And all through this period there were cultural issues dragging down American competitiveness and productivity. Japan has a vastly higher savings rate than the U.S., its citizens live to work, and its executives don't expect to make a hundred times what the average worker makes. As for Germany they increasingly import cheap foreign labor to keep the party alive.
By the way, we are not the only country losing "good jobs" (manufacturing) to outsourcing and cheaper competition. That is a big issue for Japan now. And China itself is seeing business go to even lower-cost suppliers.
There's always a faster gun and a cheaper supplier.
benEzra
Moderator Emeritus
Actually, what I was referring to was the vastly lower quality of American memory chips at that time due to Silicon Valley's "ain't-never-done-it-thataway-before" attitude toward statistical process control (remember Deming?), and the resulting shift toward Japanese manufacturers. The Japanese were thinking outside the box; we weren't. The result was vastly higher quality of Japanese chips, since they embraced statistical methods of QC wholeheartedly and American companies then had to play catch-up. More recently, Japanese companies have made a series of bad decisions (billions they spent on "4th generation supercomputers" in the '90's, while we were quietly reinventing the supercomputer ourselves, come to mind...or all the money Japan poured down the maglev drain...)
Actually, Japanese workers work less per year than we do, and take more vacation time. Americans are statistically the hardest working people of any industrialized country, at least as measured by hours worked.
I was under the impression that most imported labor in Germany was for the less-skilled jobs and service-industry type professions.
Monkeyleg
Member.
The Japanese automakers began outsourcing manufacturing jobs to Africa back in the 1990's. Don't remember particulars as to numbers, but I'm sure that cost some Japanese jobs.
The Japanese economy is still a bit of a joke, though they seem to have folks convinced that everything is normal, and no, they really are not printing Yen as fast as possible...
They do make very nice vehicles though...
It would not suprise me in the least to find that German auto manufacturers are also propped up by their government.
I suspect the Chinese will cause those two countries similar problems in five years once they have their manufacturers up to speed.
Whether or not there will be large numbers of people able to afford to purchase those vehicles is another question.
The US is still the largest market in the world, if we are not buying enough many countries including China are in a world of hurt.
This is why no one wants the US to go into recession, much less depression.
They do make very nice vehicles though...
It would not suprise me in the least to find that German auto manufacturers are also propped up by their government.
I suspect the Chinese will cause those two countries similar problems in five years once they have their manufacturers up to speed.
Whether or not there will be large numbers of people able to afford to purchase those vehicles is another question.
The US is still the largest market in the world, if we are not buying enough many countries including China are in a world of hurt.
This is why no one wants the US to go into recession, much less depression.
- Status
Similar threads
