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. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
GM, Ford reputations take a hit
"Bill Putney" > wrote in message ... > And to others, being treated right means the manufacturer fixing what > are very obviously design mistakes in the vehicle even if the warranty > has expired. "Design mistakes?" Maybe. When these problems show up and are not corrected nor supported for LONG periods of time, one might wonder if these defects are not planned obsolence, or intentional time bombs. |
Ads |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
GM, Ford reputations take a hit
"Joe" > wrote in message ... > > "Mike Hunter" > wrote in message > ... >> Unfortunately to many customer, 'treating costumers right,' equates to >> fixing the vehicle for free for as long as they one the vehicle. LOL >> >> mike >> > > > No doubt that's a strong motivator for some customers. The 100,000 mile > warranties were designed to appeal to them. > > It is, after all, what I do at home. I don't spend much money at all > fixing my cars. Maybe $100 a year per car, if that. My expectations are > going to be hard to live up to. Actually, this is an inexpensive thing for the car makes to do. Some of the repairs they already cover if there is a design problem with the car or truck. And most vehicles don't need major covered repairs in the first 100,000 miles. Things like brakes are considered normal wear and tear items, so they aren't covered. So it is usually not a big cost for the car makers. Some Hyundai dealers near where Mike lives purchase insurance contracts (aka extended warranties) on the drivetrain for their costumers for between 100,000 and 200,000 miles (after the regular 100,000 mi warranty expires). Most people don't keep their cars that long, so it is a small risk. Jeff |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
GM, Ford reputations take a hit
"Bill Putney" > wrote in message ... > Mike Hunter wrote: >> Unfortunately to many customer, 'treating costumers right,' equates to >> fixing the vehicle for free for as long as they one the vehicle. LOL > > And to others, being treated right means the manufacturer fixing what are > very obviously design mistakes in the vehicle even if the warranty has > expired. And not go through hoops to get the repairs covered. My father has a 2001 or so Grand Prix. My dad a lot of engine rebuilding and head repair work for the dealer over maybe 40 years. When there was a problem with the transmission, most of the costumes got a replacement transmission, but had to pay for the labor. However, because my father knew the people in shop, they got GM to pay for the whole thing. All the costumers, not just my dad, should have gotten the whole thing done without cost. After all, they paid for a working transmission when they bought the car. Jeff > Bill Putney > (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address > with the letter 'x') |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
GM, Ford reputations take a hit
> wrote in message . net... > > "Bill Putney" > wrote in message > ... > >> And to others, being treated right means the manufacturer fixing what >> are very obviously design mistakes in the vehicle even if the warranty >> has expired. > > "Design mistakes?" Maybe. > > When these problems show up and are not corrected nor supported for LONG > periods > of time, one might wonder if these defects are not planned obsolence, or > intentional > time bombs. Considering that the next version of the engine or transmission has this problem fixed, I doubt it is a design feature, as you suggest. The other thing is that the automaker who made the faulty vehicle is less likely to get repeat business, whether it is to buy a car for the owner's kid or replace the fault vehicle. One thing is clear, there are fewer new cars on the American road than last year. Auto sales are down like 2.6% from the previous year. They were down in 2005, too. And Americans are driving more each year. Cars are more durable than ever before. It used to be that car engine would last maybe 100,000 mi, if the owner was lucky. Now engines regularly go to 150,000 or 200,000 mi or more. This was good for my dad and my college education. Dad owned a machine shop that rebuilt engines. He also made lots of money selling tail-pipes, shocks, carburetors, spark plugs and ignition parts. With fuel injection, electronic ignitions, longer-lasting shocks and stainless steel tailpipes, they rarely sell these parts, now. And there is far less engine-rebuilding work now than 20 or 30 years ago. In fact, one of the five machine shops in town closed completely, the staff at his shop is down 75% (from 6 to about 1 1/2), two of the remaining shops have much small staffs, too. The market also changed with a lot of the tailpipe and shock business going to chain stores that don't go local independent warehouses; a lot of garages put on new rotors rather than have them resurfaced because the cost of new rotors is better. In addition, dealerships will often get new short blocks or engines for in-warranty work rather than send out to work to a machine shop. So the loss of business is due to both the increased longevity of engines and the changing market. Jeff |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
GM, Ford reputations take a hit
"Joe" > wrote in message ... >> "Some O" > wrote in message >> ... >>> In article >, >>> "Jim Higgins" > wrote: >>> >>> > Ford and GM have lamented the fact that many car buyers simply don't >>> > consider them anymore. GM has conducted focus groups that show its >> vehicles >>> > get much higher marks when their Chevy or Pontiac nameplate is >>> > replaced >> by a >>> > Toyota badge. >>> > > Beyond their quality, they have an additional problem that they can't get > control of. Many of their dealers make it pure torture to both buy and > own their products. Many of their enemies were created by the dealers, > not the product or the corporation. > > They say they can't really tell their dealers what to do. They're > independent. Personally, I bet there are people everywhere who would be > more than willing to represent them. Actually, they can pull the dealership from a dealer if they don't make quality standards. One Caddy dealership closed up near where I used to live (Crea Caddy - maybe Mike knows these people). The new dealer was required to increase the size of the showroom within a certain amount of time. If a McDonald's gets a lot of complaints about a particular independent francise, they will investigate. If there are problems with the way the restaurant is run (other than the restaurant sells lots of unhealthful food), McDonalds will either pull the francise or take over the restaurant if the problems aren't fixed. Likewise, if a dealer refuses to repair cars with complicated problems (I know of one dealer who was known to try to get complicated problems sent to another dealer) or gives a really poor costumer service experience, the car makers should be able to step in. My dad used to sell and repair Kohler, Tecomsah and B&S engines. If he didn't meet the quality standards (mostly for training), he would not have been a dealer for them. I would be surprised to learn that if a dealer doesn't do an adeqaute job, that the maker can't pull the francise. I think the Japanese excercise these rights more often than the big 3. Jeff |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
GM, Ford reputations take a hit
"Jeff" > wrote in message news21yh.7001$_d4.3877@trndny05... .. > > Considering that the next version of the engine or transmission has this > problem fixed, I doubt it is a design feature, as you suggest. Sorry, Jeff, when it takes GM 10 years or better to correct an obvious problem, then your explanation doesnt wash. |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
GM, Ford reputations take a hit
"Jeff" > wrote in message news:Lb1yh.3205$yH3.489@trndny07... > I would be surprised to learn that if a dealer doesn't do an > adeqaute job, that the maker can't pull the francise. I think the > Japanese excercise these rights more often than the big 3. It is not as easy to pull a franchise as you might think. Remember Ford and the "Blue Oval Certified Dealer" fiasco? Ford wanted to identify dealers that met certain minimal standards. A group of dealers in Texas sued Ford saying this wasn't fair - and won. States have very restrictive laws that favor the automobile franchise owners over the manufacturers. State legislatures are a lot more likely to favor local dealers than far off manufacturers. The Japanese manufacturers often have better franchise agreements (from the manufacturer's standpoint) than US manufacturers. They arrived much later and avoided many of the bad ideas in the much older US manufacturer's franchise agreements. The newer brands (Acura, Lexus, even Saturn) have even more restrictive agreements. I was surprised that GM got away with creating the Saturn brand. If I had been running a Chevrolet dealership when Saturn was created, I'd have been very upset if GM granted a Saturn franchise that competed with me. I suppose this is why GM originally set Saturn up as a completely different (but wholly owned) corporation. Ed |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
GM, Ford reputations take a hit
> wrote in message . net... > > "Jeff" > wrote in message > news21yh.7001$_d4.3877@trndny05... > . >> >> Considering that the next version of the engine or transmission has >> this >> problem fixed, I doubt it is a design feature, as you suggest. > > Sorry, Jeff, when it takes GM 10 years or better to correct an > obvious > problem, then your explanation doesnt wash. Which problem are you talking about? Ed |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
GM, Ford reputations take a hit
"Jeff" > wrote in message news:Lb1yh.3205$yH3.489@trndny07... > I would be surprised to learn that if a dealer doesn't do an adeqaute job, > that the maker can't pull the francise. I think the Japanese excercise these > rights more often than the big 3. > > Jeff I had to go to the Buick zone representative a few years ago when I encountered a dealership that couldnt seem to repair the serious problem, wasnt interested, and wouldnt listen. After 5-6 visits to the dealership, with the service manager telling me he couldnt find the problem if is it intermittent, I asked him to let me ride with the mechanic and I would show him what was happening. No dice. Then I asked if he had checked TSBs on this car. He said he had. As soon as I called the rep, he knew immediately what was wrong, said that a bulletin had been issued, and contacted the dealership. Within minutes the service manager called me, all upset, asking why I called zone, that it could get them in trouble. Tough ****! The owner called me and apologized. Yes, the manufacturer can demand quality if they want to. |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
GM, Ford reputations take a hit
"C. E. White" > wrote in message news:45c8a1f1@kcnews01... > > "Jeff" > wrote in message > news:Lb1yh.3205$yH3.489@trndny07... > >> I would be surprised to learn that if a dealer doesn't do an adeqaute >> job, that the maker can't pull the francise. I think the Japanese >> excercise these rights more often than the big 3. > > It is not as easy to pull a franchise as you might think. Remember Ford > and the "Blue Oval Certified Dealer" fiasco? Ford wanted to identify > dealers that met certain minimal standards. A group of dealers in Texas > sued Ford saying this wasn't fair - and won. States have very restrictive > laws that favor the automobile franchise owners over the manufacturers. > State legislatures are a lot more likely to favor local dealers than far > off manufacturers. The Japanese manufacturers often have better franchise > agreements (from the manufacturer's standpoint) than US manufacturers. And the big 3 surely have had the oppurtunity to read the Japanese aggreements. They could have failed to renew the francises or put in new terms. The francise aggreements are not for ever. Jeff > They arrived much later and avoided many of the bad ideas in the much > older US manufacturer's franchise agreements. The newer brands (Acura, > Lexus, even Saturn) have even more restrictive agreements. I was surprised > that GM got away with creating the Saturn brand. If I had been running a > Chevrolet dealership when Saturn was created, I'd have been very upset if > GM granted a Saturn franchise that competed with me. I suppose this is why > GM originally set Saturn up as a completely different (but wholly owned) > corporation. > > Ed > |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Ford chief seeks help from Toyota | Grover C. McCoury III | Ford Mustang | 111 | January 9th 07 06:46 AM |
Visit to the Ford Dealer | Mort Guffman | Ford Mustang | 25 | July 24th 06 08:45 PM |
Ford Mustang (and other) OEM Parts books for sale | Joe | Ford Mustang | 0 | March 19th 06 06:38 PM |
Ford Posts Profit, Autos Disappoint Again | Grover C. McCoury III | Ford Mustang | 1 | January 20th 05 06:05 PM |