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 newsgroups » Driving
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

The dangers of DRLs



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #341  
Old July 16th 05, 12:18 AM
223rem
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

C.H. wrote:
>
>
> Everything. If a car is not fun to drive I don't bother buying it. And if I
> want a fun little commuter I am much more likely to buy a Neon SRT-4 than a
> Corolla XRS.


The Neon SRT-4 is indeed nice. No question it is infinitely more fun
than the Corolla.

The question is whether it is reliable. Not very likely, given that
it is in its first (or second) year.

Same question applies to the hemi engines.
Ads
  #342  
Old July 16th 05, 01:46 AM
C. E. White
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"N8N" > wrote in message
ups.com...

> A lot *fewer* people have been buying GM recently than has been the
> case in the past, that's a fact.


Check your facts.

From
http://www.forbes.com/markets/2005/0...701video3.html

GM Sales At 19-Year High
Annalisa Burgos, 07.01.05, 5:35 PM ET

NEW YORK - In the headlines this afternoon, General Motors' U.S. sales last
month hit its highest level in nearly 19 years.
-----------------------

From
http://www.gm.com/company/investor_i...ighlights.html

GM Worlwide Sales (Units)
1996 - 8,400,000
1997 - 8,776,000
1998 - 8,024,000
1999 - 8,786,000
2000 - 8,746,000
2001 - 8.073,000
2002 - 8,411,000
2003 - 8,098,000
2004 - 8,241,000

Ed



  #343  
Old July 16th 05, 03:13 AM
James C. Reeves
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"C. E. White" > wrote in message
news:2OYBe.178129$xm3.68157@attbi_s21...
>
> "N8N" > wrote in message
> ups.com...
>
>> A lot *fewer* people have been buying GM recently than has been the
>> case in the past, that's a fact.

>
> Check your facts.
>
> From
> http://www.forbes.com/markets/2005/0...701video3.html
>
> GM Sales At 19-Year High
> Annalisa Burgos, 07.01.05, 5:35 PM ET
>
> NEW YORK - In the headlines this afternoon, General Motors' U.S. sales
> last month hit its highest level in nearly 19 years.
> -----------------------


Uhm, the operative words here are "last month". The "employee discount"
marketing campaign was genius and produced a 41% anomoly. A anomoly does
not a trend make. All months in 2005 prior to June had year-over-year sales
number declines.

> From
> http://www.gm.com/company/investor_i...ighlights.html
>
> GM Worlwide Sales (Units)
> 1996 - 8,400,000
> 1997 - 8,776,000
> 1998 - 8,024,000
> 1999 - 8,786,000
> 2000 - 8,746,000
> 2001 - 8.073,000
> 2002 - 8,411,000
> 2003 - 8,098,000
> 2004 - 8,241,000
>
> Ed
>


I see that 2004 was a improvement over 2003, 2001, and 1998. It fell short
compared to 2002, 2000, 1999, 1997 & 1996. If one were to graph these
numbers into a trend line (the 1996 to 2004 numbers), it would be a
declining trend. Up until June (which is the month of the employee discount
campaign) 2005 sales were off 2004 levels substantially. I understand the
41% pop in June brought them close to 2004 levels now.


  #344  
Old July 16th 05, 04:32 AM
C.H.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

223rem wrote:

> The Neon SRT-4 is indeed nice. No question it is infinitely more fun
> than the Corolla.
>
> The question is whether it is reliable. Not very likely, given that
> it is in its first (or second) year.
>
> Same question applies to the hemi engines.


The LS1 was reliable right from the start. Why shouldn't the Hemi be? If
Toyota or Honda made either you would be raving about it. But of course, it
is american, so if you can't find fault with its performance you have to
with its reliability.

Chris
  #345  
Old July 16th 05, 04:34 AM
C.H.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

223rem wrote:

> C.H. wrote:
>
>> Because the Sonata is a horrible car.

>
> Edmunds.com disagrees.


Edmunds is good for checking prices. For auto tests I go elsewhere.

> But I'm sure you've driven it.


The new Sonata? Not yet. And to be quite honest, I'm not really interested
either, but I suppose eventually I'll get one as a rental.

Chris
  #346  
Old July 16th 05, 04:41 AM
C.H.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

James C. Reeves wrote:

[whine...]

If GM sales are down, GM is at fault. If they are up, GM still is at fault.

The 'employee discount' campaign is not so successful because the savings
are greater than they were before but because people know they get a decent
deal without having to haggle for all kinds of 'college discount' and
'dealer incentive' and so on.

Face it, most people do not like to haggle. And I think the discounts, many
of them with conditions attached or '2 at this price' were not making many
people wanting to buy. I personally love to haggle but I know I am the
exception, which is why a straightforward marketing campaign like 'you pay
what we pay' is successful.

And if GM keeps up the good marketing more and more people are going to
notice that GM doesn't sell a Citation or Pontiac 6000 any more but good
cars for the money.

Chris
  #347  
Old July 16th 05, 11:21 PM
James C. Reeves
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"C.H." > wrote in message
...
> James C. Reeves wrote:
>
> [whine...]


I called the GM marketing campaign "genious". And you call that a whine?
The rest of the comment was statistical fact (which can be turned around).

>
> If GM sales are down, GM is at fault. If they are up, GM still is at
> fault.


No kidding. Do you have someone else in mind that is at fault for either
situation?

> The 'employee discount' campaign is not so successful because the savings
> are greater than they were before but because people know they get a
> decent
> deal without having to haggle for all kinds of 'college discount' and
> 'dealer incentive' and so on.


No arguement from me. Interesting that the Washington Post (a couple of
Sunday editions back), mentioned that the average sales price for GM cars in
June was about $200-400 *higher* compared to previous months in 2005. The
employee discount isn't really the better deal comapratively speaking to the
rebate and incentives that had been in place. But the marketing apparently
made it sound better...pure genious.

> Face it, most people do not like to haggle. And I think the discounts,
> many
> of them with conditions attached or '2 at this price' were not making many
> people wanting to buy. I personally love to haggle but I know I am the
> exception, which is why a straightforward marketing campaign like 'you pay
> what we pay' is successful.


Did I say genious... :-)

> And if GM keeps up the good marketing more and more people are going to
> notice that GM doesn't sell a Citation or Pontiac 6000 any more but good
> cars for the money.


No argument from me on that (some exception, but fewer then their used to
be).




  #348  
Old July 16th 05, 11:29 PM
James C. Reeves
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"C.H." > wrote in message
...
> 223rem wrote:
>
>> The Neon SRT-4 is indeed nice. No question it is infinitely more fun
>> than the Corolla.
>>
>> The question is whether it is reliable. Not very likely, given that
>> it is in its first (or second) year.
>>
>> Same question applies to the hemi engines.

>
> The LS1 was reliable right from the start. Why shouldn't the Hemi be?


The new Chrysler HEMI engines are "displacement-on-demand" technology that
switches to 4-cylinder operation when under light load. I'd likely wait 3
to 4 years before buying one as well to see how well those engines pan out
over time. We all remember Cadillac's similar "V8-6-4" technology.

> If Toyota or Honda made either you would be raving about it.


Not me...never owned either one either. Even if I was interested, I
wouldn't buy first or second run vehicles from any manufacturer.

> But of course, it is american, so if you can't find fault with
> its performance you have to with its reliability.
>


Why say stuff like that to/about people?



  #349  
Old July 17th 05, 11:23 AM
C.H.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Sat, 16 Jul 2005 18:29:57 -0400, James C. Reeves wrote:

>
> "C.H." > wrote in message
> ...
>> The LS1 was reliable right from the start. Why shouldn't the Hemi be?

>
> The new Chrysler HEMI engines are "displacement-on-demand" technology that
> switches to 4-cylinder operation when under light load. I'd likely wait 3
> to 4 years before buying one as well to see how well those engines pan out
> over time. We all remember Cadillac's similar "V8-6-4" technology.


As the Hemis are not available without ABS anyway there is no chance that
you will buy one ever - or is ABS ok after all as long as it is not from
Chevy?

>> If Toyota or Honda made either you would be raving about it.

>
> Not me...never owned either one either. Even if I was interested, I
> wouldn't buy first or second run vehicles from any manufacturer.


Say, since when is your name rem223? The comment was a direct answer to
a rem223-posting and I really have to wonder why

>> But of course, it is american, so if you can't find fault with its
>> performance you have to with its reliability.
>>

> Why say stuff like that to/about people?


Because unfortunately it is true.

Chris
  #350  
Old July 17th 05, 11:29 AM
C.H.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Sat, 16 Jul 2005 18:21:00 -0400, James C. Reeves wrote:

>
> "C.H." > wrote in message
> ...
>> James C. Reeves wrote:
>>
>> [whine...]

>
> I called the GM marketing campaign "genious". And you call that a whine?


Yes, because you are trying to insinuate that this was only a short lived
success.

>> If GM sales are down, GM is at fault. If they are up, GM still is at
>> fault.

>
> No kidding. Do you have someone else in mind that is at fault for either
> situation?


I would not call good sales numbers anyone's fault. They are GM's success.

>> The 'employee discount' campaign is not so successful because the
>> savings are greater than they were before but because people know they
>> get a decent deal without having to haggle for all kinds of 'college
>> discount' and 'dealer incentive' and so on.

>
> No arguement from me. Interesting that the Washington Post (a couple of
> Sunday editions back), mentioned that the average sales price for GM
> cars in June was about $200-400 *higher* compared to previous months in
> 2005. The employee discount isn't really the better deal comapratively
> speaking to the rebate and incentives that had been in place. But the
> marketing apparently made it sound better...pure genious.


No, the deal is better for many people. With the rebates and incentives
the customers were suckered into the dealerships where the sales droids
promptly would proceed to dismember the less experienced ones by thelling
them 'oh, we already sold the one car we had at that price, but here is a
XXX at $YYYYY ($YYYYY > MSRP, but they of course don't mention that),
that's a great deal. And people get pressured into really bad deals.

With the employee pricing the cars are stickered much lower than they
previously were and they are stickered consistently, which makes even the
less haggle experienced unlikely to get suckered into a bad deal.

>> Face it, most people do not like to haggle. And I think the discounts,
>> many
>> of them with conditions attached or '2 at this price' were not making
>> many people wanting to buy. I personally love to haggle but I know I am
>> the exception, which is why a straightforward marketing campaign like
>> 'you pay what we pay' is successful.

>
> Did I say genious... :-)


You mean ingenious or genius, one or the other. In this context ingenious.

Chris
 




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
Enable Caravan Daytime Running Lights (DRL's) Option ls_dot1 Chrysler 11 May 26th 05 01:49 AM
Disable DRL'S on 2002 S-10 Pete Technology 41 May 24th 05 04:19 AM
Disable DRL'S on 2002 S-10 Daniel J. Stern Driving 3 May 24th 05 04:19 AM
Why no rear lights with DRLs? Don Stauffer Technology 26 April 26th 05 04:16 AM
Chevy Tahoe DRls? BE Driving 0 March 28th 05 03:45 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:53 PM.


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