Manufacturing Quality

"Howard Nelson" wrote

I realize Macs are superior buildwise and OSwise.

???

Do some reading about chip speed, and operating speed, and you will wonder
why you wrote that.
--
Jim in NC

We want big and powerful.


Until the fuel prices climb some more...

Perhaps fuel prices will hurt while paying for the big and powerful, but for
some it is not want, but *need*, for the big and powerful.
--
Jim in NC

In article ,
Matt Whiting wrote:
As someone who purchased a new-construction home in the last few years,
it amazed me at how much money many new home buyers will pay for
absolute crap. There are an amazing number of developers who build
nice-looking but otherwise trash houses on postage-stamp, benched lots,
and charge outrageous prices--and sell out the developments time after
time. I guess I'm in the wrong business.

I wrote the above, not Newps. So who are you really agreeing with?
Newps who says sales volume is synonymous with quality or me who says it
isn't necessarily so.

Quality, price, color, capability, value, etc. are all items that may or
may not impact a buying decision. Certainly, Ford's sales record with
trucks isn't won on price (they're expensive), probably not on color,
and their chart-topping sales record wouldn't existing for 30 years if
there were widespread quality issues. The reality is that, in the truck
market, Ford/GM/Dodge are more in tune with what most Americans want in
a truck--they provide a better overall value. The domestic
manufacturers build good trucks, otherwise they would not continue to be
sales leaders year after year. Note that I'm talking about TRUCKS, not
SUVs minus the roof over the back, or what could probably be called
"soccer mom trucks."

So, I'm agreeing with Newps that long-term quality and value are likely
responsible for Ford's impressive sales numbers. I am agreeing with you
that sales volume is not always synonymous with quality, but in this
case I believe that it is. A 30 year contiguous sales record isn't the
result of a "lemming-effect" or a perception-driven market.



JKG

In article ,
Stubby wrote:

Thomas Borchert wrote:
Newps,

We want big and powerful.


Until the fuel prices climb some more...

Fuel cost is insignificant to those seeking a squirt of testosterone.
That's the only way I can explain guys driving around a load of air in
the back when they could be enjoying a nice Lexus.

I suppose that no one has any use for the utility that trucks provide?
Can you pull that horse trailer with your Lexus?


JKG

Matt Whiting wrote:



We'll see. They haven't so far these last 30 years.


They haven't had any thing close to a full-size truck until fairly
recently.

I understand that, but they have competed against the big three in the
small pickup market since the 70's and have had their ass handed to them
all that time.

Matt Whiting wrote:




Which was my point exactly. Newps doesn't understand that quality and
sales volume are often not correlated.

Over the short term, yes, I agree with you. But 30 years? Sorry,
that's just crying in your beer. You don't fool people with an inferior
product for very long. And I include Windows in that list. I've tried
others. Overall I've got what I want.

Jonathan Goodish wrote:

The Ford/GM dominance of the truck
market likely makes the costs to gain market share prohibitive for the
Japanese competitors.


But it could be done. Look at the goofy looking Civic Honda brought
over in the 70's. We all laughed. Then we all bought one and today all
cars are 10 times better than the crap we used to buy in the 70's.
Who knows why manufacturers do what they do. Why did Ford and Dodge
give the market to GM for the Suburban class of vehicle for all these
years? Why did GM not compete in the Explorer class?

Thomas Borchert wrote:

Newps,


We want big and powerful.



Until the fuel prices climb some more...

It's at $3 a gallon now and there's no sign of a let up in truck sales.

Matt Whiting wrote:




I wrote the above, not Newps. So who are you really agreeing with?
Newps who says sales volume is synonymous with quality




I never said that or even hinted at it. You may disagree but to me Ford
is the best built truck. A million people a year likewise agree.

In article , "Morgans"
wrote:

I realize Macs are superior buildwise and OSwise.

???

Do some reading about chip speed, and operating speed, and you will wonder
why you wrote that.

Are we forgetting about the difference between RISC and CISC and pipelines?

--
Bob Noel
Looking for a sig the
lawyers will hate