🚀 go-pugleaf

jfh@greenber.austin.ibm.com (John F Haugh II) writes:
>curt@aixwiz.austin.ibm.com writes:
>>You've claimed that the thousands of Consumer Reports respondants
>>selectively forgot how crummy their Japanese (but not U.S.) cars were,
>>but provided no convincing evidence of this or even a theory of how
>>it might have happenned.

>Example 1). The Mitsubishi Eclipse is manufactured in this country by
>Chrysler Motors.  Chrysler sells it as the Plymoth Laser.  However,
>despite being made by Chrysler, Mitsubishi outsells Plymoth 17 to 1.

If this is true, there could be several reasons.  Consumer Reports
shows no perceived difference in quality between them.  Perhaps in this
one case where Chrysler just didn't market or distribute well, and
Mitsubishi did.  Who knows?  In any event, this one case does not a
trend make.
 
>Example 2). I pointed out that American quality, as measured by JD Power,
>is significantly better today than Japanese quality was 10 or 15 years ago

So what.  Apples and Oranges.
 
>Example 3). I related a story in which American congressman who were
>proposing increased fuel economy requirements for American cars were asked
>which cars were the gas guzzlers - they said the American cars, but in

In a Detroit rigged demo using the perfect examples to support GM's case.
So what.  GM 1, Congress 0.
 
>Using the "3 examples is enough" rule, I think I've managed to prove that
>there is a serious difference between perception and reality for American
>cars.  

Maybe so.  But I'm not arguing against that.  I'm arguing against your
contention that American cars are better than Japanese cars, which is
just bullshit.  Consumer Reports is my evidence.  Used car prices are
more evidence.  You've changed your position.  

And well you should.

>The theory that people incorrectly remember based on whether they
>perceive the thing as good or bad was supported by the statement that
>women don't count pregnancies which ended in abortion as pregnancies.  You

A very emotional event much more likely to produce selective memory than
buying a car.  Apples and Oranges.  Certainly selective memory exists.
Brand name recognition is an example.  But millions of car owners can't
all be wrong.  The market can't be wrong.  Used car prices can't be wrong.
CR readers can't *ALL* be wrong.  Not year after year after year.
 
>I have also shown that Japanese cars don't last based on availablity of used
>cars - you claim this is because Japanese car buyers never sell or trade
>in their cars since they run so well.  

I didn't say never.
And because there just weren't that many Japanese cars by market share
as American ones in 1970, which was your basis for comparison.  Even now
the Japanese have only 30%.  What was their market share in the 1970?
5%?

>Furthermore, you claim that you can't
>get a loan on a Japanese car if you are poor is simply nonsense, as I
>pointed out using the example of Credit Cars.

Poor people can not get loans as easily as the rich.  Fact of life.The
interest is higher and the loan amount is less.  Credit Cars says "your
paycheck is your credit" or some BS like that.  Alot of those people in
East Austin don't have paychecks.  Not regular ones.  But anyone can
obtain a 1970's smoking army tank.

Credit Cars would rather lend less than more to unqualified
applicants.  And that means the poor are stuck with junky American cars
which break down constantly instead of Japanese ones which keep on
ticking.
-- 

curt@aixwiz.austin.ibm.com (Curt L. Finch) | AIX NFS/NIS Field Quality 
My views are unrelated to those of IBM     |        Austin, TX
"We have no rules around here. We're trying accomplish something."-Thomas Edison