Smoke and Mirrors

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(malorn @ Nov 2 2005, 01:04 PM) [snapback]149374[/snapback]</div>

Am I missing something here? Is the problem that the Japanese are better at being capitalists than we are? Or better psychologists? Hey--you think our big multinational companies might be able to, I don't know, LEARN how to play the capitalist game from someone who is newer at it than we are? Gasp! Someone else is BETTER at something than we are? Quick--make 'em illegal. But not until you hire some of their marketing and pr people...



<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(malorn @ Nov 2 2005, 01:13 PM) [snapback]149384[/snapback]</div>

Faulty assumption--NOT green image as such--THEY ARE FUNCTIONAL SMALL CARS. MUCH more reliable than equivalent US cars--when there even WERE equivalent small cars. I have had a '75 Toyota Corolla, '91 Honda Civic HB, '91 Acura Integra HB & '06 Prius. I don't want a big car. I now own a "not-big" car that HAPPENS to get killer mpg. I don't give a damn about Toyota's corporate "image." I care about Toyota's corporate performance. Have you seen the Toyota rep on line here, responding to questions from folks on this very board? Just out of curiousity, a) are there any equivalent on-line communities for any big 3 vehicles, and B) do you suppose any big 3 employee hangs out AND ANSWERS QUESTIONS on them? (I really do want to know about b--I suspect the answer would be no, because americans are too afraid of being sued.)

 

This constitutes my non-response.

Have a nice day.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(malorn @ Nov 2 2005, 07:53 PM) [snapback]149663[/snapback]</div>

WHERE is the viable American alternative to Prius? Or is this about the trucks, which Toyota has the nerve to be making and selling to god-fearing americans who are only supposed to buy them 'murican trucks, by gum. h34r:

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(malorn @ Jun 9 2006, 08:27 PM) [snapback]269017[/snapback]</div>

Last time I checked, none of the money anyone spends on a Hummer goes to California, as such either. My sales tax dollars do, whichever one I buy. The Toyota dealership in Santa Rosa seems to have lots of happy employees, whose $ do contribute to California'a economy. And, I wasn't going to buy any truck. I bought a car. My question was, where is the American version of the car I just bought? I have never bought a truck because I have never needed a truck. I admire Japanese products, because they improved from the post War production of consumer goods that were crap to be among the most reliable in the world. Note that word: RELIABLE. My 30 years of personal experience with Japanese cars, while watching multitudes of friends and family members struggling with breakdowns of American cars--CARS CARS CARS...tells me that, if my Prius is just a smokescreen, then by god, gimme more o' them smokescreens. Last I checked, most of our federal tax dollars were paying for a war, not for schools, or health car, or parks or even state government. The sales tax on my 23k car is way more to the point, as is the number of people Toyota employs selling this little hot number called the Prius--those dollars do way more for my schools, parks and local gov'mint than any $ GM corporate earns--but yes, had I bought an american CAR, it would have had the same local effect, with the addition of helping to enrich Exxon and Mobil and all their buddies way more than my Prius ever will. Oh yeah--there are american tires on the car, and I am sure other bits and pieces, and I expect that Toyota does pay some tax probably. Your arguments here just do not hold water. WHAT CAR CAR CAR CAR CAR SHOUOLD I HAVE BOUGHT? GO ONTO A TOYOTA TRUCK FORUM AND BASH THEM--THERE IS NO US EQUIVALENT OF THE PRIUS. At your dealerships, do your salespeople work for free? They don't at the Toyota dealerships either. And the Toyota salespeople mostly probably don't commute to work from Japan. Do you know how many Priuses are sold per week in this country? How many CARS of a similar size do you sell a week? Probably not as many, but I don't know. I will venture to guess, however, that, should you, if you have not already done so, open a Toyota dealership--you are gonna have a helluva lot of your salesfolk want to switch to the Toyota sales because THEY can make more $ to take home to their families.



Come back and bash me when you can tell me what US CAR can match all of the specs of my Japanese CAR.



<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(malorn @ Jun 9 2006, 08:39 PM) [snapback]269027[/snapback]</div>

See above. I have not at all been talking about trucks. You are in a CAR forum--apples and oranges.

 

Malorn,

If you're still wondering whether or not to add a Toyota dealership to your company (or even if you've already decided to), get your hands on a copy of "The Prius that Shook the World"--it's the story of how and why they developed their hybrid system. Read it cover to cover. I think you'll be enlightened, and it may change your mind about some things.

 

While Toyota is building vehicles in the US, GM is building them in Mexico, when they are not simply importing DaeWoo.

This business of buying GM to support the local/national economy is so much bunk.

The general notion of buying inferior, more expensive local goods is also debateable from an economic standpoint. The money I save by buying reliable, low maintenance transportion *is* spent locally, rather than adding to GM executives golden parachutes.

And lest someone other than malorn doubt that Toyota is much more reliable than GM/Ford/Chrysler, I point the interested reader to I think June 2006 CR.

A THREE YEAR OLD DOMESTIC HAS AS MANY PROBLEMS AS AN EIGHT YEAR OLD HONDA/TOYOTA. Like JDP says, most cars start off pretty close together; but as JDP tries to obfuscate, over time the reliability differences are astounding.

I also have zero interest in trucks; but if I was going to buy one, it would be a Toyota. Not for better FE, but for reliability.

 

How 'bout we talk apples and apples for a change...just for a change...When I was in the market for my latest car, I did, in fact, do research. I researched apples and apples: in this case, the ONLY candidates were Honda and Toyota CARS, if we are talking about only looking at fuel efficiency. If that was all I was concerned with, the Honda would have won. (And I didn't really even NEED a car--I just WANTED one. I still have a perfectly funtional '91 Acura Integra, with close to 130k miles on it, that even car dealers told me I still can expect another 60k or so to go with it.) Ok, I'm shallow. I chose to buy the slightly less fuel efficient Prius because--and ONLY because--the Honda is, I am sorry, ugly, in my opinion. Between Honda and Toyota, the technology--which, last I checked, was ONLY available in the two Japanese cars--is similar enough. BUT--the bells and whistles--ah, those got me. Once again, I was not, and likely will never be, in the market for a truck. What American (or any other nationality, for that matter) CAR can give me anything close to what I got with the Toyota Prius? And should I have NOT bought the Prius because I don't like Toyota's trucks? Is that stupid or what? Toyota has proven that it is investing in the future of the planet while, yes, it is making filthy amounts of money for its investors. Shucks, a company in business to make MONEY? How stupid!



OF COURSE, GM has not now and never will make any vehicles in the hopes of making MONEY--why, we all know they are a huge charity. Doing well by doing good. And Roger Smith took those 30k people who lost their jobs in Flint and gave them other jobs, right? Gee, that is exactly the number I seem to recall you mentioned as being now employed by Toyota in this country. Sorta poetic justice, innit? I do not know, maybe GM has been shooting itself in the foot for a lot longer than, ooh, what, the 10 years or so that Toyota has been working on the Hybrid Drive? Nahh. Toyota obviously was planning way back then to steal the truck business from the Americans and has stealthily been plotting to take over that lucrative market and jump out from behind that curtain and fall all over themselves laughing at us for being suckered into buying their stupid, useless, tricky Hybrid cars in the meantime.



And everyone knows that Toyota has been behind the Americans' love affair with fossil fuels, and has overseen the dismantling of all sorts of public transit systems--yeah, I noticed you don;t like public transit--you are damn lucky to NOT HAVE TO. Personally, I would very much like to be able to choose, but I can't. There is no viable alternative in most of this country--US automakers not only killed things like trolley systems in various cities, but also emasculated the passenger train system. But hey, what's a few billion gallons of fossil fuel between friends, eh?



Oh, and by the way, since they started selling Hybrid CARS, as of the end of April, Toyota has sold 500,000 worldwide since their introduction in late 1997 (http://www.caranddriver.com/dailyautoinsider/11218/toyota-prius-reaches-sales-milestone.html), only(!) 1/2 of which have been sold in this country. Yup. A quarter of a million cars in six years. That sure is the death knell of the American Auto Industry, innit?



And what dang furriners have bought out our guvamint, that made our guvamint offer TAX INCENTIVES to purchasers of these cars--NOT Toyota Tundras, NOT JUST Toyota Hybrids--ALL HYBRIDS THAT ACHIEVE CERTAIN MPG STANDARDS WITHIN EACH CATEGORY. Yup--FORD, Toyota, and Honda vehicles. Notice that FORD in there? Do you see any GM there? Chrysler? Chevy? No? Maybe I'm a tad cynical, but it seems a helluva lot more likely to me that FORD is riding on Toyota's and Honda's coattails with a smokescreen (you should pardon the expression)trying to sell more of its trucks, using GREEN to hide behind--or that is what I would think if I could not perhaps believe that maybe, just maybe, there is some social responsibility going hand in hand here along with looking out for the bottom line. Now isn;'t THAT what capitalism is all about? I think it is. You, on the other hand, seem to believe in something a tad closer to protectionism--not merit, not market forces, but you're in America, so by god, buy American. Bzzzt. That, my friend, is NOT how it works here, now is it? Would you really want it to? Well, yeah, I guess you do have a vested interest in just that. Some of us did not inherit the family business and make at least some of our decisions based on informed research and not blind faith and allegiance.



(And, just for diversion, how 'bout we talk about the outstanding success of an early attempt of Americans to compete in the small car market: http://www.fordpinto.com/blowup.htm)

 

hope Malorn are using a pc thats 100% american,, else he should remove some of the foreign chips or diskdrive, memory or......

as a norwegian this actually fun to read this tread and observe.

seems to me that malorn kinda says that toyota have an easier time in the media than Your american car companies. he might have a point there. in the world now the trend is that "green" is the thing and gasguzzling cars are not. the higher cost of gas and laws of restriction of emissions makes that trend stronger everyday.
This should not come a suprise on car companies,they have do come up with models that fits the trend and potentional marked to come , this take time. comes down to strategy, analyzing and so on,, takes time to devlop those cars/tech aswell... And toyota have done so, and using that in pr and marketing aswell ...
thats what You do when You run a good business........ GM seem to missed some of that on the way and gets a harder time in the media .... happens when u dont run your business well..


and over here a gallon of 95 octane cost around 7 dollars, diesel ca 6dollars, and high tax on the cars You buy calculated by weight ,engine displacment an Horsepower. well then you probably dont buy a big american car...... we se american cars as something exotic and some of the models are really awsome, but would cost way to much to use as a daily car... the ones we could buy is a korean with a american brand sticked on it......no thanx...... Id love to buy an high quality american ,efficient hybrid.... afterall many of the car icons from the past and now are american
Your country that need so much "fuel to run the country" should have been in the frontier of developing alternative cars and tech. You have the people and and the industri... its Your flag thats on the moon... so making some super green machines should be possible.... id buy one

andreas

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(andreaswin @ Jun 10 2006, 05:13 AM) [snapback]269123[/snapback]</div>

Well said, Andreas, and thank you for the more global perspective! Your views on this issue are particularly valuable since Norway does have more than a little bit of oil, doesn't it? And yet you still have the foresight to conserve what you have, through measures like taxing its use to discourage an apparently American tendency to live only for ME and TODAY. If we were to take a leaf out of that book (and I do believe we should!), there would be far fewer of those iconic american gas guzzlers on the road, much less new ones to be created. Not that I would WANT to drive one of them goofy little rollerskate like SmartCars (no, I have to admit, I will stick with my SmartKEY, thank you very much!) Again, thanks for your input!

 

almost all cool things are a product of a global ecomomy these days...the important thing is that the money is flowing...so buy what you want regardless of where you think the item was made, because the flow of global capital benifits all anyway in the end.

 

Wholly Molly!.... I can't believe this thread is still alive!....
I thought we settled this issue?...

GM sucks and Toyota rules... so what is there to discuss?

And BTW...malorn you should be a Toyota dealer by now I trust based on your last assertions at becoming one?...

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(windstrings @ Jun 11 2006, 01:48 PM) [snapback]269631[/snapback]</div>

Boy windstrings, you are tough! You all had your fun, so us newbies CAN'T? VERY harsh, dude...And, based on malorn's most recent comments here, I reckon his bro's smart approach has NOT won--seems likely malorn is using at least one of his god-granted guns to continue to shoot himself in the foot...

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Rufaro @ Jun 11 2006, 05:22 PM) [snapback]269729[/snapback]</div>

Its weird, I thought I was still linked to this thread, but I haven't seem anything about it for months.. I thought it was dead.. I found this thread by accident.....

Almost like leaving a soap opera for a few months and coming back.... :lol: :lol: Nothings changed!

 

Tonight I watched a tv program about the movie that will be hitting theatres sometime this summer about how general motors killed the electric car. Thats right! California had insisted on a percentage of cars being run on electricity. GM developed a reportedly great car that was popular with owners. The problem is that GM did not sell the cars--they only leased the cars. A decision was made at the corporate level to not renew the leases nor sell the cars to the owners. Instead the cars were shreded--thats right, perfectly good cars that were valued by their users were shreded. It seems that electric cars do not need fixing and GM like computer printer companies make money from repairing their cars. Thats why they sell their cars for cost--because they expect to make their profits in repair bills. I think the public should demand value for their money and hope that toyota continues to make good cars that will last!!!

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Owen @ Jun 11 2006, 07:53 PM) [snapback]269798[/snapback]</div>

I believe that.... it only makes sense... thats exactly what the bottom of the barrell compaq computers were doing.... they make crap knowing they will see you again!
They literally make more money in the repair department than they do in sales!

that is a terrrrrible broadcast of American greed, deceit, and trickery to make the almighty buck. What a wonderful testimony to the whole world about our quality and character of principles.

And we wonder why we are not trusted?.. we endorse untrustworthy companies!

GM deserves its demise........ At least Ford and some others are trying to redeem themselves, GM has not yet repented that I can tell and so should be sucked into the toilet of their youth. They have spent years crapping on others and flushing.. now its their turn.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(malorn @ Jun 12 2006, 02:19 PM) [snapback]270140[/snapback]</div>

Which one?.. the one about compaq?

 

Here we are ...

10 months later & I'm ready to reply. I had to wade through these reems of nonsense, and wait 'till I found the appropriate article. Never mind that boy genius ~ GM dealer wanted to troll to death about trucks on a car blog ...
Never mind he bloats GM's ranks by including its business partners (which are them selves going bankrupt or are their selves on the verge of bankruptcy.
Never mind the fact he's worried about us "good ol boy" citizens of the good ol boy U.S. of A. . . . in other words ... to him, "Love thy neighbor" ends at the state line. Who is your neighbor? Next door? Next city? state? Country? If you ARE a loving person, you don't have to be TOLD to love your neighbor. If you DON'T love your neighbor, then you WILL ask who is my neighbor ... because you won't want to extend any charity beyond that border . . . WILL you.

God forbid other country's poor are able to enter the world-wide manufacturing game ... especially if it means we have to lay off assembly line folks from their high paying - unskilled job and take a crummy lower paying job. Heck ... go back to school! That's what I did. Go re-invent your self Mr. GM dealer ... before it's too late! Get your head out of the sand and sell Toyotas! F__k GM.

We are on the cusp of a paradigm shift due to "peak oil" ... and how does GM Respond? By advertising Hummers and crushing EV1's which by the way ... they only made ev1's because they were FORCED into it. A_s hole GM loosers. Their recent Hummer ad shows rude / mean spirited creeps - cutting in line - only to have their victims go out and buy hummers ... so they too are now empowered with the same self serving mean spirit. Yes ... sell gluttonus hummers and crush ev1's. Lovely.

Sorry if I tangented. Let me get back to pathetic low quality GM trucks ... since it soooo important to GM Sales guy that we waste time talking about pathetic GM trucks on the best / environmentally friendly gas driven car blog. Here's one of the most recent articles relating to GM's pathetic attempt at continuing their asinine behavior ... ignoring that we are running low on fossil fuel ... but continuing the high profit mentality of selling their big junk trucks. Why did I include the article below? Because Mr G.M. truck guy brags how fuel efficient their gas guzzler trucks are. The article below points out how G.M. employs the smoke and mirrors effect of E85 fuel to skew their own pathetic fuel efficiency results. Figure this ... if GM wants to pursue E85 ... it's GOT to be bad for you and I ... and profit their self at our expense. Read it and weep:

Flex-Fuel Fallacy
By ERIC PETERS
updated:2006-08-20 11:53:38


The sticker looks mighty tempting -- a full-size, seven-passenger SUV with a V-8 engine rated at a hybrid-like 33 mpg!

Too bad it's a sham.

Unfortunately, the shuck and jive isn't well-known, or apparent to consumers -- who might be gulled into believing they're helping cut down on energy consumption (and saving the planet to boot) when in fact all they're doing is supporting the latest government boondoggle for the benefit of the politically powerful ethanol lobby.

Here's how it works:

Under the cover of promoting "renewable" energy, the federal government has put into place a loophole in its Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFÉ) requirements -- which require the automakers to achieve a "fleet average" of 27.5 mpg for cars and 21.5 mpg for trucks or face so-called "gas-guzzler" taxes that are passed on to the consumer. This loophole distorts the truth about a vehicle's actual mileage capability -- but only if it's a vehicle made to run on either gasoline or a gasoline-ethanol blend known as E85.

Such "flex fuel" vehicles are credited with much higher miles-per-gallon capability than they actually get -- on the theory that when they burn E85 (which contains 85 percent corn alcohol and 15 percent gasoline) they are using less gas. Thus, a full-size, V-8 powered SUV like the GMC Yukon is rated at 33 mpg for CAFÉ purposes -- higher than the current passenger car CAFÉ minimum of 27.5 mpg -- when in fact it only gets 15 mpg in city driving and 20 mpg on the highway, according to the EPA (which is just below the 21.5 mpg minimum mileage for trucks and SUVS under current CAFÉ rules).

The E85 Yukon and vehicles like it get even lower mileage when running on fuels containing large concentrations of ethanol -- since alcohol-based fuels contain less energy per gallon equivalent than straight gasoline.


What Do You Think?
As a result of this loophole, GM, Ford and other automakers have been given a strong incentive to build large numbers of E85-burning "flex-fuel" vehicles -- vehicles which might not make the CAFÉ cut otherwise and thus be less economic to produce because of "gas guzzler" taxes that jack up the price of a given vehicle by as much as $1,000 or more.

But the idea is to create market demand for the heavily-subsidized ethanol industry -- not produce more fuel-efficient vehicles. According to a NY Times piece by Thomas Friedman, the E85/CAFÉ loophole "increased U.S. oil consumption by 80,000 barrels per day in 2005 alone." GM has built some 2 million flex-fuel vehicles -- many of them large trucks and SUVs that would otherwise be subject to gas-guzzler fines, absent the clever accounting tricks.

The ethanol lobby has also been aggressively pushing its product on the supply end -- via a proposal that's been floated in Washington to require E85/ethanol pumps be installed at service stations -- in effect, forcing oil companies to subsidize the product of a direct competitor. (And of a product that is itself already heavily subsidized on multiple levels.) Stations would have to invest in new tanks/pumps and so on -- much if not all of it on their own nickel.

It would be the equivalent of mandating that McDonalds sell Wendy's burgers -- or that Ford dealers set aside a portion of their new car lot to sell GM vehicles. Pretty nutty, And that's at odds with basic principles of a free market. Why should gas stations (or anyone else) be compelled to sell a product they might not want to? In particular, one that is produced by a rival industry which already benefits from generous government protection?


Talk About It
Tell us what you think of the Fuel Loophole:

AOL Autos -- Message Boards
This, however, seems to be the only way the ethanol lobby can do business in this country -- a consequence of the fact that E85 costs a relative fortune to make, uses oil in its production (everything from the petroleum-sourced fertilizers used to grow the corn to the plants, trucks and other infrastructure involved) and contains less energy per gallon equivalent than still-cheaper regular unleaded. These factors have rendered it a tough sell on the free market.

But the free market is not what the ethanol lobby is interested in.

E85 may have a role to play in reducing this country's dependence upon foreign oil. But it shouldn't be oversold, let alone forced down our throats -- or given special loopholes that encourage circular results such as the production of large numbers of especially fuel-inefficient vehicles like "flex fuel" SUVs and pick-ups.

GM's Vice President of Global Communications, Steven J. Harris, says that "we can significantly reduce the amount of oil we use right now" by driving E85/flex-fuel vehicles -- but such Enron-esque fuzzy math CAFÉ accounting doesn't take into account all the oil and energy that's burned up along the way.

Whether it's burned up in our tanks -- or burned up to get our tanks full -- the end result is the same.