Fox T-Bird/Cougar Forums

Everytime I read about the quality of Toyota better than any of the Big 3 makes me puke, Toyota is in better position because the american market is like a bitch with the legs open everybody comes in, Why dont puppiesan opens there market and let the big 3 enter to their backyard ?:flip:

Evidentally you never owned a Toyota. They dont break as often as American cars do. No matter what you are buying, people have the power when it all comes down to it.

Unfortunate to say I owned a 2001 Toyota Camry new from the dealership and I had to take that car about 4 to 5 times in the first year because of the check engine light and had some problems starting in the morning and you call that quality :evilgrin:

Whether the quality gap between puppiesanese and domestic manufacturers is real or only perceived, a great deal of the problem is how the customer is treated

Even those of us on the left can have a problem with Unions. ;)

i cant think of 1 new ford id buy now. used id consider an 0304 cobra or mach1 and even those have their issues....

Toyotas are very well built, but very boring. Ever since the Supra died Toyota has no exciting products. Quality aside, they're the GM of asian manufacturers.

No exciting products? Tacoma, Tundra and 4Runner. When was the last time (in USA) that auto manufacturor offered a rear locking differential for their trucks? Toyota started it in the 90's. No other company even offered it(maybe now, but not sure). If your not into trucks, I can see where you are coming from but they are far, far from GM it is not even funny. If the Supra wasn't so expensive I would have that instead of my Mustang.

I will take a Toyota over just about anything when it comes to reliability.

James

Toyota builds rock solid cars, true, but rocks aren't very exciting.

Whether the quality gap between puppiesanese and domestic manufacturers is real or only perceived, a great deal of the problem is how the customer is treated 


How the customer is treated is a quality issue in itself.

WUDDAAYAMEEN workers paid too much???  Do you not understand that management make 2 gazillion times what the assembly line worker makes.

$60,000 per year line workers

If $28 per hour was minimum wage, how great would America be then???!!!

It is not $60,000 per year line workers that are ruining the industry - they are saving it

Well, a gallon of gas would cost about $15, a pack of smokes would be about $20, a bottle of pen 15e would be about $5, a bag of chips would be about $5...

Why? Because if you had to pay all of the workers (the people that drive the trucks, pick the potatoes, pump the gas, etc) $28 an hour everything would have to skyrocket in price to pay those wages. And a new car would cost $200k, because the UAW workers would not be content making minimum wage, they'd demand $150/hour to ensure they are better paid than most others.

It's people that think they're worth $60k/yr for screwing plastic bits to a car body on an assembly line (which, whether you like it or not, is unskilled labour) that are killing the American EVERYTHING, not just the car industry. Know why TV's are assembled in puppiesan and Malaysia? 'Cuz RCA can't afford to pay Americans $60k/yr to screw circuitboards into housings when Malaysian workers will do it for $60/day. Know why cities are contracting out public works services such as garbage collection? Because the can't afford to pay garbage truck drivers $30/hr when the private sector pays 'em $15. Know why Wal-Mart is so anti-union? Because it has low prices by paying employees low wages. Wal-Mart has no problem getting people to work for those low wages, but unions are trying very hard to destroy that. So what will happen when unions eventually muscle their way in? The prices will go up, the revenues will drop, and stores will close.

And what is wrong with executives taking large paychecks? That is what a free market system is al about. The bosses make more money than the workers. If bosses didn't make the big bucks there would be no bosses. With no bosses there would be no big business, and therefore there would be no jobs. The automotive industry (in fact, all industry) is not a charitable organization and aside from the fact that unions essentially forced them to, automakers are not obligated to keep workers living in luxury from cradle to grave. It is a business and it exists to make money. If GM doesn't pay Bob Lutz big bucks Honda will, so GM needs to pay him that much. And if you compared what mamangement makes to what the workers (and retirees) make it would be a drop in the bucket.



How, exactly, does forcing an industry to pay its unskilled labour fully three times what it's worth "save it"? If the USA was the only place on earth that cars were made your logic might work, but the Americans are forced to compete with foreign companies that are far more streamlined and far more cost effective. Your "saving" the industry is doing nothing but sending jobs to Mexico. Look at how many idle plants Ford has in the USA (including the recently closed Lorain, OH plant), yet they built a new one in Mexico to make the Fusion. They did that because they get equal (or better) quality labour for much less money. This means higher profits and that, in fact, is what is "saving" the industry.

And if you think the puppiesanese, Korean and European automakers have hit the domestics hard, just wait 'til Chinese cars start hitting our ss. To quote BTO: You ain't seen nothin' yet. IT is quite possible that the entire American industry could be wiped off the face of the earth, to be absorbed by foreign makes. Preposterous, you say? It happened in England, and it is already 1/3 completed here (DaimlerChrysler). The modern American auto industry used to be Packard, Studebaker, AMC, Chrysler, GM, and Ford. Now only GM and Ford exist. Toyota has already toppled Ford as number two and is rapidly gaining on GM. Think about that.

Get off your silly, hobbled high horse before its legs break out from under it and it keels over. We all know what happens to horses with bad legs...

WUDDAAYAMEEN workers paid too much???  Do you not understand that management make 2 gazillion times what the assembly line worker makes. Further, as an ex Ford Truck plant assyline worker (1969 - wage was $3.52 per hour - enough to buy new car & house at the time) Why in the world would you blame the worker for the AWFUL MANAGEMENT?  EX:  If you had the BILLIONS that GM has, do you think YOU WOULD LOSE MONEY?  Well, you might if you payed executives $300,000 plus salaries for doing nothing but maintaining their power base, if you stopped innovation in favor of short term cost savings, GRRRR WAKE UP PEOPLE!  It is not $60,000 per year line workers that are ruining the industry - they are saving it - along with the job of the local merchant, restaurant, appliance manufacturer etc etc.  Stop sounding like parrots and think logically!  If $28 per hour was minimum wage, how great would America be then???!!!

Shouldn't it be "the big two", now that Chrysler is foreign owned..?

Unfortunate to say I owned a 2001 Toyota Camry new from the dealership and I had to take that car about 4 to 5 times in the first year because of the check engine light and had some problems starting in the morning and you call that quality :evilgrin:

Rocks don't always need to be exciting. I'd guess a large number of Camry/Accord/Altima owners don't really care about "driving excitement". They want a solid, reliable car with a good resale value. In that respect, the Camry and Accord are a toss-up. Look up the specs between the two, it's like they copied each other.

My mother just bought an '06 Camry. She originally went to get and Accord (because the Civic she had previously did well) but the dealer dropped the ball. She ended up getting the Camry.

I thought about sending her off to test-drive a Fusion, but I didn't want to hear her complain if it ever broke down. Toyota and Honda have quite a reputation for reliability, even if it isn't totally true at this time. Plus, if the Fusion takes after most other Fords, the re-sale value is going to be sub-par compared to the Camry/Accord.

Maybe a little perspective...

Toyotas, Hondas, Nissans, even BMW's are now made in America. The U.S. has opened the doors for its own domestic car competition to come on in, build a plant, build cars, hell, we'll even give them tax incentives to do it. Land of the free? Yes. However, I find it ironic that the U.S. would shoot itself in its own foot just to get businesses to relocate to this country. America is therefore its own competition.

On the other hand...there are a lot of good, hard-working people at those plants. And they have the right, no, the OBLIGATION to drive what they build, at least in brand name. The Chevy Cobalt is built 25 miles from where I live. We are bombarded with ads on TV from car dealers, mostly of GM origin. As a Ford guy, do I complain? No. Those people at the plant keep our sad local economy going. The only way they will continue to do so is to buy what they build. This is a matter of pride, sure, but the economic impact is far reaching, moreso than any other industry I can recall. It doesn't matter if the car is a GM, Ford, Mopar, Nissan, etc.--the net result is the same.

One thing the foreign brands have proven is that the 'old way' of thinking in Detroit will no longer be enough for the Big Three to compete in its own country. It was looooooong overdue, but the typical American consumer ignored that for too long. Now, with new domestic-foreign competition, the American car companies don't look so bright, do they? At the same time the consumers caught onto that, since the level of expectations has risen dramatically in recent years.

A good deal of sales have undoubtedly happened due to the perceived 'quality' issue. I will be the first to admit that American car parts are maybe not the best when viewed globally. But they are inexpensive and usually readily available. A comparable foreign car part, even if made/assembled in America, can arguably be of better quality....but Lord have mercy if you ever need to replace it--it's going to be an expensive bill. Some parts can only be obtained from their source origin countries too---mmmmm, foreign shipping. Lovely. This is the only area where the Big Three can hold its own ground anymore. They will not win the parts war on quality but they will NOT be outdone in price and sheer volume. OK, it's a stalemate that we win by default. Woohoo. But it is at least something to counter the quality Kool-Aid that the foreign automakers expect us to drink without question.

Are foreign (or domestic-foreign) cars made better? Is their quality really that much better? They want you to think that. Truth is, they helped the Big Three close that gap. Again, the bars are constantly being raised, and the level of expectation continues to climb. Well, the American cars are also climbing up the scale, but the media--the unmitigated purveyor of many untruths--never seems to dwell on that. What is sadly obvious is that the Big Three are not innovating so much anymore...they are relegated to playing catch-up in nearly every situation. But they can certainly compete on a quality level. A quick look at the JD Power survey (http://consumercenter.jdpower.com/) will show as much. Even base Fords are above the industry average now. So...that pretty much shoots any argument down from foreign carmakers.

It does boil down to the product. And frankly, there isn't a whole lot to get excited about when looking at what the Big Three are offering. We have some pretty awesome cars available--Corvette, Mustang, 300C, Viper--but they are niche cars, low-volume production, not mainstream as they may have been even 15-20 years ago. In other words, not everyone wants one of those cars. They seem to want something a little more practical. Sometimes the vehicle that gets the job done best, no matter how unattractive the body styling is, will get the sale. How else can the sales of the Camry, Accord, and even the Aztek be explained?! ;) I think what handicaps Detroit cars is that they usually do one thing great, but other things not as well as the competition. The Accord and Camry aspire to do all things well, with nothing really ever standing out. That's their modus operandii. And apparently there are just truckloads of vanilla, plain-Jane lemmings clamoring for such vehicles. And since these cars are relatively reliable, and every year we're reminded of this, and people "hear good things about them" from others...guess who gets the sale. This completely bypasses any offering from Detroit, even if they actually have a worthy or emerging competitor (such as the Fusion, and perhaps even the new Impala SS). In order for the Big Three to ever regain sales like they did 15 years ago, they must break this aforementioned cycle of ownership, and the only way to effectively do that is to offer product that will outdo their competition. So far that's not happening, but they definitely have the means to do so. It is probably just a matter of time.

One thing remains constant: the dealership is the ONLY bridge between the consumer and the car manufacturer, period. How one is treated at the dealer will absolutely make or break the car company. In this respect, the American way of doing business cannot win in its present condition. The Big Three need to get their collective act cleaned up, their commitment to the buyer renewed, and the old way shoved out the door. This is the area where foreign automakers seem to have a great advantage, but it's not like we can't see that. Certainly the Big Three know this. They simply choose not to act upon it, perhaps smug in their current old-school capabilities, that maybe the old way is better, that maybe another heyday of Detroit iron will magically return. While they keep dreaming, American consumers are going with the companies that treat them the best. And they aren't the Big Three.

That being said...I completely agree with the title of this thread. :)

Know why TV's are assembled in puppiesan and Malaysia? 'Cuz RCA can't afford to pay Americans $60k/yr to screw circuitboards into housings when Malaysian workers will do it for $60/day.

If this thread continues, I will find more LIGITIMATE statistics about how much management "earns" compared to what they contribute Vs. the labor force.

Please do. If anything, your post proved the point that unions inflate the wages of their members.

Union members earn 43% more compensation than non-union members, that is a little excessive.

I can not for the life of me understand a) why people think that $20 an hour or so Plus benefits is such a fantastic wage and

I am here to annoy people with the facts again and to ask them to examine their own logic.

Add the $12 per hour mentioned in previous post for benefits and calculate that (this is not researched but, the assumption is that for example, salaried Ford workers get very similar benefits of production workers as noted by Bureau of Labor Statistics)

"blame the worker for earning too much" is not the answer

I am here to annoy people with the facts again and to ask them to examine their own logic.

The FACT is, According the the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, management wages are much higher than union wages.  Example:

11-000 - Management Occupations -  6,085,780 people who do this. 
        Median Hourly wage = 36.52
        Mean Hourly Wage = $41.87 
        Mean Annual = 87,090

(my number not USDL - add in benefits) - $104,000 Mean annual salary for office workers/managers.
 


This $7,090 is WAGE not benefits.  Add the $12 per hour mentioned in previous post for benefits and calculate that (this is not researched but, the assumption is that for example, salaried Ford workers get very similar benefits of production workers as noted by Bureau of Labor Statistics) the Mean wage when benefits are included is close to $50 and the mean annual compensation package is around $104,000 ($50 per hr X 40 hrs * 52 weeks)
        Imputed Mean annual wage $104,000 

Unlike the gazillion figure, which I pulled out of my hat, these are Department of Labor figures for all management positions across all industries, that is, the auto industry is not singled out.  I can not establish which side of the mean they are on but welcome anyone to research for different number than simply the mean.  I have fridnds in that industry, and I know what they do, how smart they are, and how well they live.

My conclusion based on FACTS:  a $60,000 compensation package for a production worker is much less than that of a college educated manager, according to the US Department of Labor.

My point: 
Based on what I read, it is generally thought by many in this thread that 60K total benefit package is outrageous.  (even though this will barely buy a condo or the most modest home (trailer)  and a new(er)  car and only minamally provide for wife, kids, orthodontics etc.)  So, in the face of a mean compensation package of 104,000 for the cube-dwellers, I ask you, "How low should the wage be for production worker?".  And, "why should they not be able to partite in America?". And,"If $60,000 is outrageous for a worker, how high do wages get for "11-000 Management Occupations" before you consider them outrageous"?.

My comment, then unless further comment on this is requested of me in particular, after this post  - (I am half sorry I mentioned it cuz I am beating my head against the wall trying to convince people that their life's labor is worth more than $8 per hour in a country where utiities alone top $200 per month((where is your sense of self-worth?))) - , so anyway after this post I want to drop this conversation and instead talk about T-Birds: 
Do you really want to live with people who have no health insurance, retirement, or savings?  People who barely earn enough to se by all in the name of providing Cushy packages for people whose parents paid for them to sit thru 4 years of college (includinging remedial reading) and therefore entitled them to spit on people who can only drive a hilo compared to being able to sit at a meeting eating bagels and deciding what to do at the team-building this year? I can not for the life of me understand a) why people think that $20 an hour or so Plus benefits is such a fantastic wage and b) why people do not recognize that it is nearly 100% management's failure to mangage that plagues our US auto industry.  C) why people do not understand that if you have a country where the workers can not afford to buy the products they make - auto worker can not afford a $19,000 new car - then we all become Mexicans, headed for Germany or France or Italy in hopes of getting decent wage and medical attention.

My useless Blustering:  So wise up!  I have not even mentioned EXECUTIVE Salaries.  I have not mentioned CEO, Board member COO etc salaries.  Any moron with an 8th grade education can lower production costs by declaring across the board wage cuts.  If the American way is to be innovative, creative, fair, hardworking, etc... then let's see it FORD, let'see it GM.  Let's see it DIAMLER. (OH YEAH.... Chrysler is MAKING GREAT PROFITS and contributing to local communities, schools, businesses while paying union wages, out building and out producing all competition) I wonder why people think "average" is to be valued as worthless in the marketplace.  An unskilled worker who demands of himself that he do his/her job well - put the emblem on straight, tighten the hard to reach bolt, use all the clips - who is dedicated to quality is WORTH EVERY PENNY TOO!!