Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

Toyota on the mend?

1457910319

Comments

  • rockyleerockylee Member Posts: 14,014
    Previously Rocky was bemoaning a 'worthless' currency.

    I never wanted our currency to become worthless. :confuse:

    I've posted this chart several times in the past and it's amazingly descriptive.
    St Louis Fed Res US$ vs Japanese Yen
    Since the late 70's and especially since the Plaza Accord the US Currency has fallen by 67% versus the Japanese Yen.


    The Yen still is 20.5% lower and your point is? We are still at a disadvantage to the Asians. The Japanese have artificailly manipulated it by 38% which means their currency should be 18% higher than ours as we are so far in debt when compared to them.

    This means that US manufacturers and US labor were 3 times less expensive than their Japanese competitors in the world market place.

    When ? and compared to who ?

    How much of an advantage do we need?

    That chart still shows me we are still at a disadvantage. Does that chart not tell you that ? Does it tell you something different ? Are we seeing the same chart ?

    Actually manufacturers all through the 80's and 90's got fat and happy, shareholders got fat and happy, state / local governments got fat and happy and unions got fat and happy.

    Yep, everyone was eating steaks and was happy. CEO's were only paid an average of 14 times their workers instead of 500 times like they are now. If a plant made $40 million the boss's were happy now they want to make $140 million. So what you are saying is we got greedy over the years and sold our country down the river for another buck. We let the global economy suck the life out of us. :mad:

    They also allowed more flexible, leaner and lower cost competitors to come into their home market and now they are too old and slow and arthritic to react very quickly.

    Yep we sold out to the Japanese, Chinese, Russians, Indians, thank-you Reaganomics. The Trickel-down theory was a disaster, we passed laws like the "Right to work" and have sold off our infrastructure, military, currency, to foreign governments. We have sold our backbone the american worker also. We might as well wave our white flag and surrender. Get your Chinese language for dummy's handbook out. :sick:

    Rocky
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Member Posts: 7,160
    A) That's what I was saying, you were complaining ( bemoaning ) about our currency becoming potentially worthless.

    B) Accepting your view that the Japanese currency is 20.5% undervalued this means that it has to be 'revalued' upward by 20.5%. This means that the US$ has to be 'devalued' by 20.5% versus the Yen. You are proposing that our currency become 'worth less'.

    That's the definition of revaluing a currency. If one goes up the other has to go down. It can happen two ways.
    ..tomorrow the Bank of Japan wakes up and says as of 9AM we are revaluing the Japanese Yen to 100 Y/ US$. It's done that's it.
    ..tomorrow the Bank of Japan begins to sell all its US$ holdings and buys back JY holdings and takes them out of circulation. It dumps T-Bills onto the market for savvy investors to scoop up at a bargain and demands Japanese T-bills in return. The US$ drops as more get dumped into the market and the Yen rises as less are available in the market. End of Day the JY is 100 / 1 vs the US$.

    What this means is that today our US$ can buy 120 JY but by the end of business tomorrow our US$ can only buy 100 JY. Our US$ has become 'worth less' by 20%.

    This is what the UAW and the State of Michigan is proposing to have happen. By making the US$ 'worth less' it protects US manufacturing and jobs by making them immediately 20% less expensive and it makes importing harder by making them 20% more expensive.

    Here is another way of saying it. Daddy ( UAW ) to teenage boy ( US public ): "I want you to stop buying those dirty magazines ( imports ) and bringing them home. If you don't stop I'm going to take away 20% of your allowance so that you can't afford them."
  • lemkolemko Member Posts: 15,261
    My girlfriend got into an accident with her Buick LaCrosse yesterday morning on the way to work. Some old biddy in a Toyota Avalon ran a red light right into the path of my girlfriend's LaCrosse. The LaCrosse suffered some paint scrapes, but the whole side of the Avalon looked like the Hulk used it as a punching bag.

    When better cars are built, Buick STILL builds them!
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Member Posts: 7,160
    This means that US manufacturers and US labor were 3 times less expensive than their Japanese competitors in the world market place.

    When ? and compared to who ?

    How much of an advantage do we need?

    That chart still shows me we are still at a disadvantage. Does that chart not tell you that ? Does it tell you something different ? Are we seeing the same chart ?

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    The graph is the value of the JY vs the US$

    Beginning in the 70's the US$ bought 360 JY. Now it buys 120 JY. This means that over the last 37 years the US$ is three times weaker than it was before.

    If you were a big manufacturer in the US back in 1970 and you wanted to export a product, costing say $1000 here, to Japan then you'd have to charge the Japanese market 360,000 JY in order for it to be equal to a sale here. ( 360 x $1000 ).

    If you did this over the entire time period of this graph and now ( excluding inflation ) you still made that same product here costing $1000, to keep the US sale and the Japanese sale equal you'd only have to charge the public there 120,000 JY ( 120 x $1000 ).

    Your price is 3 times cheaper now than it was in the 1970's.

    Looking at it from the flip side of the coin.

    You are a big investor or company in Japan. You want to invest in the US. In 1970 you have an opportunity to buy a site and building for $1.0 Million.

    In 1970 to make this investment you have to take 360 Million yen out of your bank account.
    Now for you to make this $1.0 Million investment you only have to take 120 Million yen out of your bank account.

    The cost of investing here is 3 times less expensive.

    If they ( Fed Res, BoJ, UAW, MI ) get their way and devalue the US$ by another 20% then an investor only needs to take 100 Million yen out of his account. The rest of the money in the account can be invested elsewhere making even more money.
  • grbeckgrbeck Member Posts: 2,358
    rockylee: So the bottom line is the dollar and just because 350,000 workers are insignificant to 17 million vehicles sold you'd rather get that extra cheap deal on your camcord at the expense of good people.

    Or, looking at it another way, the UAW expects everyone else to buy an inferior product just so they can continue to pretend it's still 1965. The only reason the domestics are as good as they are now is because ferocious competition forced them to dramatically upgrade the quality and value of their products.

    rockylee: This type of mentality is why we are failing.

    The mentality I see as an indication of failure is blaming currency manipulation, consumers, culture and practically everything else under the sun for current problems, instead of buckling down and doing what needs to be done.

    rockylee: "As long as my pocketbook is good screw everyone else"

    Yes, from what I've seen, that seems to be the UAW mentality. I missed the part where union members and leaders really expressed concerns about quality. They've practically had to be dragged, kicking and screaming, into making changes that will ultimately improve productivity and quality.
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    plows much of its North American profits right back into its North American operations. They are already planning three new plants here in the next 5 years, and they have just barely got finished building the San Antonio plant.

    Make the dollar stronger against the yen (which by the way doesn't happen in a vacuum, as kdh has been explaining - also consider that America's MASSIVE MASSIVE foreign debt and ENORMOUS expenditures on foreign wars has been suppressing the dollar's value for years now - add in the real estate bubble and I don't expect to see the dollar's value rise much in the next 5 years) and you just give Toyota more incentive to double the number of plants it needs/wants to build here.

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • hypnosis44hypnosis44 Member Posts: 483
    A lot of Voodoo economics and false correlations there spyder!

    Exchange rates are affected by many factors, among them; regional weather, political climate, productivity, balance of payments, free reserves, interest rates, currency management efforts, hedging, oil prices, shipping rates, speculators and far more.

    Exchange rates do not necessarily affect the price of anything. Exporters, the Japanese ion particular, have been known to quite frequently lower or raise their prices to make or keep their products and services competitive, or returning a high margin, or to maintain market share in the face of currency fluctuations.

    There is no direct correlation between wages and exchange rates. If there was then wages would rise and fall by the minute, week, day. Additionally, since Japan seems to be the target here, energy costs which are among the highest in the world, shipping dependency which is affected by geo political factors, an aging population and shrinking work force all mitigate against the Japanese.

    So where is the problem? American union workers? No! In well documented studies over some years unionized Japanese plants in the same region as US plants using the same workers, paying the same wages and benefits, with the same work rules, had higher productivity and better quality than their American counterparts.

    So what are the only factors not shared by the Japanese and Americans? First, and most significant is management, and I mean that all the way to the so called US President! American management, until just recently, was locked into failure and a circle the wagons mentality, as well as "pay management and investors regardless of costs". The second is investment philosophy! American investors want immediate payoffs at the expense of expansion and productivity improvements; Japanese investors wait for a lifetimes payoff. This allows for more investment in productivity and ultimately a bigger and longer lasting payoff.

    The issues are still far more complex than these discussions can easily encompass, but it is something anyway. What is needed is a coordinated and rational approach from an international level along the lines of the UN to address the underlying issues. China is the gorilla on the horizon that will make our history with Japan look like a fairy tale.
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Member Posts: 7,160
    I'm taking a simplified approach to show what would be the effect of a sudden change.

    Of course exchange rates are affected by many factors. They can also be changed by the click of a button or a signature on a treaty.

    Exchange rates absolutely do affect the price of products. I was involved closely for the better part of 40 years in doing just that. Looking all over the world for products and currencies that were bargains then looking for the most advantageous currency rates then looking for the most lucrative markets to sell into. I often bought products in Portugal or Spain in the local currencies, converted them to Canadian dollars or Mexican peso and sold the products in Canada or Mexico depending on where the market was stronger.

    Then did it in reverse when currencies moved the other way.

    China is the gorilla in our backyard. China has been a gorilla for over 2000 years. Sometimes though it's just been asleep. There is only one man-made object visible from the upper reaches of our atmosphere in outer space.

    The barbarians of Europe were shocked at the wealth in the Orient.
  • grbeckgrbeck Member Posts: 2,358
    hyponosis44: What a bizarre and misinformed attack on your fellow Americans. Are you signing up with Al Quida as well? Your misinformation is far more deadly and destructive to this country than a hundred collapsed buildings at the hands of nut jobs.

    Pointing out that the domestic plants have a bigger problem with daily absence rates and cling to outmoded work rules and job classifications at least partially because of the UAW - which hurts both quality and productivity - is now equated with terrorism? What utter nonsense.

    Try refuting those facts - you'll have more credibility.

    Of course, you can't - that is why we call them facts - so I guess ad hominem attacks will have to suffice instead.

    Incidentally, in her book The End of Detroit, Micheline Maynard quotes a GM official who said that Toyota can build the same number of vehicles as GM with 1/3 the workers. Considering that Ms. Maynard is a frequent contributor to this site, if you have problems with her, you may want to contact the people who administer Edmunds.com.

    hyponosis44: As you well know the transplants are also significantly union shops here and in Canada. The difference, if any, (listening to Fortune is like listening to child molester who want a preschool built next door), can be attributed to management.

    The above statement shows a serious credibility problem, and it isn't with Fortune.

    No U.S. Honda plant is unionized, and the only Toyota U.S. plant that is unionized is the Fremont, California plant (which was part of Toyota's joint venture with GM). The other Toyota plants are all non-union, as are the Nissan plants in Tennessee and Mississippi.

    hypnosis44: Having spent some time in management I can say that they are more absorbed in lining their own pockets and treating their workers like garbage than they are about building cars, or anything else that we used to build here.

    And the UAW isn't much better. It's more a matter of whose pocket is being lined.

    The last time I checked, neither side spent too much time worrying about pleasing the customer with a reliable, well-built product, which is really the only reason ANY company exists.

    If you think companies exist to provide workers with jobs, you may need to do some more research.

    hyponosis44: When you find yourself on the street as we "race to the bottom" in part by destroying unions that built this country, you will be looking around for someone to help you out and we will all have been used up and buried by then. Tick, tock, tick tock my friend!

    Unions didn't "build this country." Men such as Henry Ford I, Alfred P. Sloan, Walter P. Chrysler and Andrew Carnegie did. They had the brains, ambition, talent to bring their ideas to reality, and those ideas grew the economy and made it stronger and more productive, thus making more wealth available for everyone.

    Unions ensured that workers got a bigger share of that newly generated wealth. But the only reason there was any wealth to redistribute in the first place was because the Fords, Sloans, Chryslers and Carnegies were able to implement their ideas and make a whole lot of money.

    If you doubt that, multiply any number by "0" and see what you get. ;)
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Member Posts: 7,160
    There is no direct correlation between wages and exchange rates. If there was then wages would rise and fall by the minute, week, day. Additionally, since Japan seems to be the target here, energy costs which are among the highest in the world, shipping dependency which is affected by geo political factors, an aging population and shrinking work force all mitigate against the Japanese.

    I didn't say wages change in relation to fluctuation is exchange rates in fact they don't at all. But to an outside investor looking at the cost of wages through the lens of currency rates they absolutely change.

    Right now a Japanese investor looks at a US labor rate of say $30 / hour. He has to budget that it will cost him 3600 Y /hr ( 120 Y x $30 ).

    If the US labor rate remains at $30 / hr but the exchange rate goes to 100 Y/US$ then he only has to budget 3000 Y/hr in his investment analysis ( 100 Y x $30 ).

    This dollar devaluation after the Plaza Accord is what instigated the creation of all the transplant factories here in the US. As nippononly noted it's getting faster and faster now with at least 3 new Toyota plants a new Honda plant and a new Hyundai plant all in the works.

    These may be a hedge against the time in the near future where the Japanese Govt 'gives in' to the political pressures from Mich and the UAW and does revalue the Yen to 100 / 1. Their investments will suddenly cost 20% less - our Dollar is 20% cheaper.
  • grbeckgrbeck Member Posts: 2,358
    hypnosis44: So where is the problem? American union workers? No! In well documented studies over some years unionized Japanese plants in the same region as US plants using the same workers, paying the same wages and benefits, with the same work rules, had higher productivity and better quality than their American counterparts.

    Is there a link to these studies? Especially since, as has been shown, aside from the Toyota plant in California, the plants owned by Toyota, Honda and Nissan in the United States are not unionized.

    And none of the non-unionized transplants have the same work rules as the GM, Ford and Chrysler plants.

    Please note that all of them - Ford in particular - have been going to their UAW locals and asking them to change work rules and job classifications to improve productivity. When the UAW has agreed to make these changes, it was because the company in question had its back against the wall.

    So far, Ford has had the most success in getting changes in various plants, probably because it has historically had a better relationship with the UAW (since Henry Ford II tried to undo the damage done by his grandfather and Harry Bennett in the late 1930s), and its situation is the most desperate.

    If productivity is so good, then why has the UAW agreed to make these changes?
  • geo9geo9 Member Posts: 735
    It seems the much ballyhooed 07 tundra is NOT selling
    as well as last years model.
    Figures from aicautosite.com:
    YTD 07 15,990 YTD 06 20,025

    Monthly sales are slipping:
    Jan 07 10,566 Feb. o7 9669
  • grbeckgrbeck Member Posts: 2,358
    Well, maybe it's because GM came out with a competitive product - called the Silverado and Sierra - and shoppers are content to stay with a proven nameplate.

    No mention of currency manipulation, cultural disadvantages or whining about unfair competition.

    Instead, a company relies on a competitive product that keeps customers happy and holds off the competition.

    Who EVER would have thought that would work? ;)
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Member Posts: 7,160
    Have you been asleep in a cave for the last year? Did you realize that sales of the new '07 began on Feb 7th? Sales in January were the leftovers of the '06's.

    In 10 years this will all look different. One month's snapshot during ramp up of the new model means nothing.

    Enjoy your little pleasures.
  • anythngbutgmanythngbutgm Member Posts: 4,277
    Tundra sales seem to be off to an early lead. I've seen more of them than those fugly new Silverado/Sierras around these parts.

    Dealers have only had trucks to sell for a couple of weeks now, and even then, supplies are limited as a buddy of mine found out when he bought his, ended up with a non-exciting sand colored one because the others had sold tags on them.

    Me, I would have waited for a red or black one to come in...
  • rockyleerockylee Member Posts: 14,014
    Got ya !!!! :)

    Rocky
  • rockyleerockylee Member Posts: 14,014
    Yes, from what I've seen, that seems to be the UAW mentality. I missed the part where union members and leaders really expressed concerns about quality. They've practically had to be dragged, kicking and screaming, into making changes that will ultimately improve productivity and quality.

    They tried to make changes but the bean counters would not listen. :mad:

    The mentality I see as an indication of failure is blaming currency manipulation, consumers, culture and practically everything else under the sun for current problems, instead of buckling down and doing what needs to be done.

    The buckling down has taken place but why not level the playing field while we are at it ? Is their something wrong with solving these important issues ? :confuse:

    Rocky
  • rockyleerockylee Member Posts: 14,014
    Nippon, I want Toyota to build all it's cars here pal. This helps take at least the currency manipulation issue out of the equation. :)

    Rocky
  • rockyleerockylee Member Posts: 14,014
    So where is the problem? American union workers? No! In well documented studies over some years unionized Japanese plants in the same region as US plants using the same workers, paying the same wages and benefits, with the same work rules, had higher productivity and better quality than their American counterparts.

    Can't we agree that the Japanese still to this day have better management people in place ;)

    Rocky
  • rockyleerockylee Member Posts: 14,014
    So you were a business that "hedged" Is that the right word? and took advantage of the exchange rates with your buisness. So now we know how "kd" got rich. :P You need to sell this on a infomercial for $39.95 and you can be the next Don Lapre. ;)

    Rocky
  • rockyleerockylee Member Posts: 14,014
    These may be a hedge against the time in the near future where the Japanese Govt 'gives in' to the political pressures from Mich and the UAW and does revalue the Yen to 100 / 1. Their investments will suddenly cost 20% less - our Dollar is 20% cheaper.

    Well that is a option we should take a look at. ;)

    Rocky
  • rockyleerockylee Member Posts: 14,014
    If productivity is so good, then why has the UAW agreed to make these changes?

    Well because you can make productivity even better by using even less people. You act like all union plants aren't efficient. That is clearly incorrect.

    Rocky
  • rockyleerockylee Member Posts: 14,014
    Just because the GM, product is better in this case doesn't mean just building better product should be the only answer. I will whine about the unfair advantages domestic manufactors face until something is done. It almost appears you support the Asians being allowed to artifically manipulate their currency. Is this because you are a huge Japanese car fan ? What's your motive ? :surprise:

    Rocky
  • hypnosis44hypnosis44 Member Posts: 483
    Hey Rocky! You are doing a great job!! I will be back at it soon.

    Hypnosis
  • rockyleerockylee Member Posts: 14,014
    hypnosis44,

    Wow their is hope in this world left.....a guy from California, who doesn't "hate" domestics :)

    I'm afraid I stirred the hornets nest an will need your help. The guys we are having a discussion with aren't bad pal. They just are all very hard headed. ;)

    Rocky
  • sellaturcicasellaturcica Member Posts: 145
    Whining about overpaid UAW union labor is pretty comical. Some of these guys were making 6 figure incomes without a college education... how can the domestics compete, having to carry that kind of labor cost, along with the health care and pension burden? Why do you think domestic companies are producing in Mexico? They're desperately trying to cut costs. Why is Chrysler going to make a small car in China, for sale in the US? Who does GM import a Daewoo small car for sale as the Aveo? Because they can't make it here for cheap enough. And that's due to the sweetheart union contracts, pension and health care burdens that are from the 1960s. It's not the 60s anymore, and Japan Inc. done ate Ford and GM's lunch a looong time ago.

    The currency values is a non-issue- if anything the dollar is due to weaken even further. The only way to protect the domestic industry is to place tarriffs on foreign products, even if produced in this country, which will never happen.

    Interestingly, unlike foreign producers, GM, Ford and Chrysler have never exported US produced cars to foreign countries that I know of- Canada is an exception, and perhaps they do it to Mexico or Latin America, which I doubt- in Europe and Australia, where they actually do well, they produce cars locally- perhaps with the weak dollar, they should start trying to export from the US if tariffs aren't too bad. Of course they'd have to retool to cars that foreign buyers would want.

    GM and Ford are going have to pull themselves up- healthcare reform would be a nice gift to them, though. Also not going to happen in time to make a difference for them.
  • grbeckgrbeck Member Posts: 2,358
    rockylee: Well because you can make productivity even better by using even less people. You act like all union plants aren't efficient. That is clearly incorrect.

    Not necessarily. Your view - which has been held by both the union and too many members of management for too long - is too simplistic.

    A smart company will help its employees work smarter, not just harder.

    The UAW has only agreed to make these changes in response to competitive pressure from non-union transplant operations based in the U.S.

    Apparently, the UAW plants have not been as efficient as the transplants, as a whole, despite a few exceptions (GM's Lansing Grand River and Oshawa plants, if I recall correctly).

    Otherwise, why would the UAW agree to make these changes now? Out of the goodness of its heart? That is clearly incorrect.

    Incidentally, this morning I spoke with an employee of Alcoa. She told me that Alcoa has been implementing the Toyota production system, which requires the worker to take a more active role in assuring quality and improving efficiency. Previously, the company had used the Henry Ford system, which placed the worker in front of a machine and told him or her to follow orders and use no initiative whatsoever.

    Most of the workers now prefer the Toyota system. Those who didn't want to think on the job have left. Quality and productivity have improved, as has the competitiveness of the company.

    The Toyota system is making major changes in America's businesses. Those who can't adapt - either companies or unions - will soon be swept away by the forces of history.
  • grbeckgrbeck Member Posts: 2,358
    rockylee: I will whine about the unfair advantages domestic manufactors face until something is done.

    Never mind that history has shown that better product is the key. And the Germans don't seem to have any trouble competing, despite currency exchange rates.

    rockylee: It almost appears you support the Asians being allowed to artifically manipulate their currency.

    What I support is having both union and management stop making excuses and focus on building a better product, which will require an overhaul of both corporate and union structures (not to mention attitudes).

    Of course, whining about other factors to divert attention from this and prevent any meaningful changes is one tactic to preserve the status quo.

    rockylee: Is this because you are a huge Japanese car fan ? What's your motive ?

    I'm a huge CAR fan. My motive is to have American car companies produce vehicles that rank among the best in the world, which won't happen until we have a major reformation of both corporate and union culture.

    My motive is also to preserve maximum freedom of choice for consumers - the ones who really matter here.

    So far, no one on this thread has presented any compelling, accurate evidence to the contrary to alter those motives. I'm reading lots of mindless business bashing, a mind-boggling ignorance of how currency exchange rates really work, and too much regurgitation of the talking points spewed by Lou Dobbs and Solidarity.
  • joel0622joel0622 Member Posts: 3,299
    Well at least they got this going fo them. :) If you are gong to try to run with he big dogs and make such ludicrious claims that you can build more cars with less of a work force this is the kind of things you have to look forward to.
    Thunder on the Tundra: Toyota Trucks Ahead in 2007 Recalls

    If you've merely done a moderate amount of Internet surfing or cracked open a newspaper lately - just about any newspaper - you've undoubtedly seen the news that Toyota has once again passed Ford in worldwide auto sales and may pass GM sometime this year.

    But what you may not have seen is that Toyota has already passed both Ford and GM in a different category - automotive recalls.

    Although we've barely passed mid-February, Toyota has already recalled 533,417 vehicles this year in a mix that, according to www.AutoRecalls.us, includes Tundras Sequoias and Camrys. That puts Toyota on track to recall more than the over 1.76 million autos they recalled in the U.S. and Japan in 2006, and the 2.2 million they recalled in 2005 when they recalled more cars than they built.

    What's more, the current recall related to the Turdra trucks and Sequioa SUVs is similar to the same defect in 800,000 of the same vehicles in 2005.

    And this

    According to Business Week's January 22, 2007 issue, Toyota has recalled 9.3 million vehicles in the last three years, which is nearly four times the number of recalls in the three year period prior to 2004.

    Other recent news that won't sit well with a Camry-conscious public is the class-action lawsuit recently settled by Toyota regarding ruinous oil sludge buildup
    covering 3.5 million Toyota and Lexus (yes, Lexus) vehicles.

    Optimistic statements by Toyota executives aren't going to cut it for long - particularly when they don't match well with reality. Denial in the Camry-company camp seems to be setting in. Toyota's North American president Jim Press recently disputed the suggestion that his company no longer enjoys a large lead in reliability over the American competition. Speculating on the thoughts of American car company well-wishers while speaking at the recent Chicago Auto Show,
    Press said "I think there's some hope that the gap in quality is closing, but it really isn't."
    Oh, really? That's a pretty strong comment considering Toyota recalled 1.27 million vehicles in one swoop in 2005, recording the biggest-ever recall in history for a Japanese car company.

    But, recalls notwithstanding, the evidence that the quality gap is closing is pretty indisputable, and the evidence has been piling up for more than just the last couple of years. With the following facts, you can make your argument for American car quality fully bulletproof - even among your most ardent foreign car-defending friends.

    * A February 10, 2003 Business Week told of how undeniable it was that GM cars are better built than they used to be. The article cited an improved J.D. Power quality ranking and a Consumer Reports recommendation for 13 of GM's vehicles (equal to 41% of their sales volume) compared to just five recommended GM vehicles for the previous year. The Chevy Impala beat the Camry in a quality survey, and Buick beat BMW.

    * Business Week also reported September 23, 2003 that GM boosted its productivity 23% in six years while Toyota's productivity remained flat, and that GM's most-productive factories now beat Toyota's most-productive factories.

    * A 2004 Consumer Reports ranking selected the Buick Regal as the most reliable among family sedans, beating the Toyota Camry, Honda Accord and Nissan Maxima. They also gave recommended ratings for four Ford models, including the Ford Focus.

    * J.D. Power and Associates awarded Cadillac's Lansing Grand River assembly center its highest honor - the Gold Plant Quality Award - in 2004.

    * An August 4, 2004 Wall Street Journal article said Toyota's lead in quality and reliability has narrowed in some segments and disappeared in others. Quality problems were reportedly "mushrooming."

    * The Toyota Camry hasn't been awarded the best in its segment since the year 2000, but many Americans continue to regard it as the number one model in terms of quality. Toyota's Kentucky Camry plant was awarded with high initial quality rankings by J.D. Power from the late 1980s through the 1990s, but it plummeted to number 26 in 2002, improving to only number 14 in 2004, while two GM factories and one Ford factory took the top three spots that year.

    * In a J.D. Power Initial Quality Survey of new 2004 cars, Chevy placed second behind Honda and Toyota sank to number three.

    * As far back as at least 2003, Business Week has reported that American consumers regard certain foreign cars as better built than American cars, even when facts prove otherwise.

    * Fast-forwarding to 2006, J.D. Power shows Mercury, Buick and Cadillac beat Toyota in a list of dependable cars. Two Buicks and a Mercury took the top three midsize car awards; Mercury, Ford and Buick took the top three large car awards; Ford took the midsize van award and the midsize truck award; and GMC and Cadillac took the large MAV (multi-purpose activity vehicle) and large premium MAV awards, respectively.

    * In an article about trust issues, Business Week's December 11, 2006 issue stated "GM's quality nearly equals Toyota's." Perceived quality among the American public is another story, however. The difference between the actual quality of American cars and the perceived quality of American cars is the "perception gap."

    * In the same article, J.D. Power's director for retail research said "Actual quality is so close." discussing the quality rankings of GMC, Chevrolet and Cadillac placing them on par with both Honda and Toyota.

    * And most recently, of course, the Ford Fusion and Mercury Milan beat the Honda Accord and Toyota Camry according to Consumer Reports.
    What's needed among automotive senior executives, and much of the media as well, is a return to intellectual honesty. Everyone tends to have their favorites and biases (mine are pretty obvious) but I pride myself in sticking with the facts to back up my comments.

    When Toyotas North American president says that the quality gap isn't really closing, he's not being intellectually honest.
    Some editorial writers aren't either. When Douglas Brinkley trumpeted Indiana's success in a Wall Street Journal article last year for attracting a Honda plant to their state - even though it took $140 million in tax credits and incentives - he wasn't what you would call "intellectually honest." In an apparent attempt to convince the reader that Honda doesn't send any automobiles to the U.S. from outside the country, he said the
    following: "Turning farm fields into factories, that's what Henry Ford used to do. Today, in the heartland, it's being done by Honda - a company that doesn't manufacture imports but builds American-made cars."

    Such statements lead the reader to think
  • joel0622joel0622 Member Posts: 3,299
    Such statements lead the reader to think that some Japanese companies make all of their cars in the USA. Hardly. In fact, according to a January 8,
    2007 Wall Street Journal article, the NAP ratio - a ratio that compares how many cars are built in North America vs. the number of cars imported - is slipping for Toyota. And according to Toyota internal documentation, the ratio is going to worsen next year.

    Occasionally I'll find an editorial writer that dares to step away from the foreign biases of others in the same industry and rate cars objectively, rather than relying on the mindset of the question "will American cars ever match the Japanese cars in quality?"

    Editorial Director for Consumer Guide Automotive Mark Bilek departed from the typical mindset of his colleagues back in June of 2005 by declaring that the Ford Five Hundred was the best car he'd ever driven.

    That's good news for Ford, since the Five Hundred is being renamed the Taurus and will get several more second-looks because of the Taurus' higher name recognition. Billek said he judged the Five Hundred based on "what it is" and how well it "fulfills its mission." Based on this, his opinion was that the Five Hundred was "simply the best full-size sedan sold in America."

    I am confident, however, that people like Toyota's Jim Press can be somewhat honest in their statements about the competition from time to time. He did say that the "car of the show" at the Detroit Auto Show in January was, for him, none other than the Chevy Malibu. Maybe there's hope for intellectual honesty after all.

    Roger Simmermaker is the author of How Americans Can Buy American: The Power of Consumer Patriotism. He also writes "Buy American Mention of the Week"
  • 210delray210delray Member Posts: 4,721
    I'll have to reply later when I have more time (I'm supposed to be at work now), but selective pulling of information, some of which is 3 years old, doesn't help in your looooong presentation.

    Come on, how long has the Buick Regal been out of production?

    Editorial Director for Consumer Guide Automotive Mark Bilek departed from the typical mindset of his colleagues back in June of 2005 by declaring that the Ford Five Hundred was the best car he'd ever driven.

    I always joke with my wife, beware of anyone who says best/greatest (or worst) ever! Like my grandmother used to say after every Thanksgiving dinner, "That was the best turkey we've ever had!" ;) (Note: I didn't say the 500 is a turkey!)

    I'm in grbeck's camp, thank you very much, but I like Rocky too for his spirited views. I'm a VERY satified owner of two late model Camrys - a 2004 and a 2005.
  • grbeckgrbeck Member Posts: 2,358
    joel0622: If you are gong to try to run with he big dogs and make such ludicrious claims that you can build more cars with less of a work force this is the kind of things you have to look forward to.

    I guess Micheline Maynard, who quoted the GM manager in her book, doesn't know what she is talking about? You need to take that up with her. You also need to compare the number of hours different companies need to build a vehicle. Forgive me, but I'm more inclined to take her word for it, based on her qualifications and expertise.

    As for the recalls - sorry, but you need to distinguish between recalls and quality. Recalls are not necessarily indicative of long-term quality, especially since a company can announce a recall for something as innocuous as a forgotten sticker.

    joel0622: But, recalls notwithstanding, the evidence that the quality gap is closing is pretty indisputable, and the evidence has been piling up for more than just the last couple of years. With the following facts, you can make your argument for American car quality fully bulletproof - even among your most ardent foreign car-defending friends.

    I never disputed that it isn't closing. But "closing" and "already better" are two different things.

    For instance, note this article you quoted: In an article about trust issues, Business Week's December 11, 2006 issue stated "GM's quality nearly equals Toyota's."

    Please note that the phrase "nearly equals" used in the headline is NOT synonomous with "better" or even "equals."

    And as for this quote: "J.D. Power shows Mercury, Buick and Cadillac beat Toyota in a list of dependable cars. Two Buicks and a Mercury took the top three midsize car awards; Mercury, Ford and Buick took the top three large car awards; Ford took the midsize van award and the midsize truck award; and GMC and Cadillac took the large MAV (multi-purpose activity vehicle) and large premium MAV awards, respectively,"...well, there is less than meets the eye.

    Most Buicks use an old platform and an even older engine (3.8 V-6). The Mercury was probably the Sable (midsize car), while the Ford was probably the Crown Victoria (large car). The midsize Ford truck was probably the Ford Ranger. All of those are very old vehicles that have been in production for years, and thus should have all of the bugs worked out long ago.

    Plus, Buicks, Mercurys and some Cadillacs (DTS) are largely bought by older people who don't drive as much, don't push their cars (75 mph is a major achievement) and are less particular about minor problems.

    Now, regarding the other Cadillacs and GMC models - good for them. There is hope.

    As for this: In a J.D. Power Initial Quality Survey of new 2004 cars, Chevy placed second behind Honda and Toyota sank to number three.

    I place no stock in this type of survey, as the first 90 days of car ownership is hardly indicative of how things will go for 3, 4 or even 10 years down the road.

    Finally, regarding this quote: And most recently, of course, the Ford Fusion and Mercury Milan beat the Honda Accord and Toyota Camry according to Consumer Reports.

    Good. I do follow Consumer Reports and like the Fusion. I'm glad that this car is turning out to be reliable, and would consider it for my next vehicle, as I really like the styling (much better than Camry or Accord).

    Of course, you do realize that Consumer Reports places Honda and Toyota first in reliability, ahead of all the domestics? Since you've quoted this magazine to support your arguments, we can safely assume that you agree with ALL of its conclusions, correct? ;)

    joel0622: When Douglas Brinkley trumpeted Indiana's success in a Wall Street Journal article last year for attracting a Honda plant to their state - even though it took $140 million in tax credits and incentives - he wasn't what you would call "intellectually honest."

    The domestics have been receiving tax breaks, incentives and infrastructure improvements from state and local governments as a condition for upgrading a plant. The transplants are not the only ones who do this. Anyone who is intellectually honest - not to mention reasonably well-informed - knows this. Remember the bidding circus that broke out among states when GM announced it would need an all-new plant for what ultimately became the Saturn division? Do you not think that GM received considerable state and local assistance when it built its brand-new Lansing Grand River plant in Michigan?

    If anyone wants to ban these tax breaks and incentives for ALL companies - foreign and domestic - I'm all for it. But let's not fool ourselves into thinking that only the transplant operations benefit from state and local government largesse with taxpayers' money. That's intellectually dishonest - not to mention pretty clueless.

    joel0622: In an apparent attempt to convince the reader that Honda doesn't send any automobiles to the U.S. from outside the country, he said the following: "Turning farm fields into factories, that's what Henry Ford used to do. Today, in the heartland, it's being done by Honda - a company that doesn't manufacture imports but builds American-made cars."

    You read too much into that sentence (which isn't too well written - "doesn't manufacture imports" is meaningless). The simple fact is that Honda does build vehicles in America. It also imports some from Japan. It used to import some from Great Britain (previous generation Civic Si). And most people don't particularly care.

    joel0622:Everyone tends to have their favorites and biases (mine are pretty obvious) but I pride myself in sticking with the facts to back up my comments.

    No, you cherry-pick selected facts to "prove" your point. Typical tactics for car salesmen - Ford, as I recall - but the people on this site tend to be much better informed than the typical customer who walks into your dealership. ;)
  • 210delray210delray Member Posts: 4,721
    Thanks for your response to Mr. Ford! It saved me lots of time!
  • grbeckgrbeck Member Posts: 2,358
    joel0622: Editorial Director for Consumer Guide Automotive Mark Bilek departed from the typical mindset of his colleagues back in June of 2005 by declaring that the Ford Five Hundred was the best car he'd ever driven.

    I agree the Five Hundred is somewhat underrated - it needs a better engine and about $100 more spent on the interior - but let's not overdo it here.

    joel0622: Roger Simmermaker is the author of How Americans Can Buy American: The Power of Consumer Patriotism. He also writes "Buy American Mention of the Week"

    And, in the interest in full disclosure, he is also a former GM executive, as I recall. Which hardly makes HIM unbiased.

    I don't take his word as gospel anymore than I do that of Toyota's Jim Press.

    This may come as a shock, but most people don't buy a car based on the words of a company's CEO. At least, they haven't since Lee Iacocca challenged them to "find a better car and buy it," or George Romney was crusading against the "dinosaur in the driveway" and urging people to buy Ramblers.
  • grbeckgrbeck Member Posts: 2,358
    You're welcome...but my lunch hour is about over!

    Thing is, I LIKE a fair number of Fords...but making excuses for their faults - or defending union and/or management shortsightedness - isn't going go save the company. (Same for GM - Chrysler, on the other hand, is just about toast, no matter what anyone does.)

    Nor will cherry picking various bits of information and using them in an attempt to make people feel guilty about buying a Toyota or Honda.

    Sorry, but that horse left the barn YEARS ago.
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    mentions that Toyota has put on a $1500 cash rebate on the new Tundra. I wonder what this means - it's too early (barely six weeks) to tell if it's selling well or not. Is it just because full-size truck buyers expect cash on the hood?

    I have seen a few of the new Tundras around already, and as of 2 weeks ago, dealers finally seemed to have enough stock. Tundra will definitely be one of Toyota's toughest rows to hoe this year though.

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • hypnosis44hypnosis44 Member Posts: 483
    Careful there grbeck - your waffling! Better read some back issues of Fortune - next thing you know you will be considering union members human beings! As for cherry picking information! I'm still laughing at that statement coming from you! More when I get my breath back.
  • hypnosis44hypnosis44 Member Posts: 483
    "Whining about overpaid UAW union labor is pretty comical. Some of these guys were making 6 figure incomes without a college education...
    ===========================================================

    This old canard was debunked ages ago!! You need to catch up. The six figure types are up in management - the one's they lay off first in a down turn because they are dead weight and over paid.
  • hypnosis44hypnosis44 Member Posts: 483
    "Interestingly, unlike foreign producers, GM, Ford and Chrysler have never exported US produced cars to foreign countries that I know of-...."
    ==========================================================

    All three US automakers have been exporting cars to Europe and Japan for decades. The volumes have varied over the years. The Jeep in Japan is regarded as "The vehicle" for new Japanese yuppies to own.
  • t_ruckyt_rucky Member Posts: 35
    Toyota is a long way away from being in any kind of trouble--especially the kind of trouble the "Big Three" have just now.
    That's not to say trouble can't or won't happen in the future, but for the time being both Toyota and Honda are way ahead of the others in model selection, fuel efficiency, reliability, and resale value retention--not to mention market share in many segments. Sorry to say, the "Big Three" are still faced with playing catch up in most categories.
    The "Big Three" do in fact export cars, pickups, SUVs, and some other models to many countries worldwide, including Japan, Europe, the Middle East, and Asia--in good quantities BTW.
    Also, six figure annual wages aren't that uncommon amongst production line autoworkers. Overtime, added to regular wages, can easily make it happen fairly often. Plus when you include benefit costs (easily averaging 20% of wage rates), "Big Three" hourly compensation packages are very lucrative compared to many other occupations--even many of the so called "professions".
    Unfortunately however, those gravy days are rapidly coming to a close!
    Strangly enough, workers in US and Canadian Toyonda plants make just as much--but their plants are much more efficient because they aren't hindered by costly, hugely ridiculous and inefficient work rules the UAW and CAW have loaded up the "Big Three" automakers with over the years. That situation is rapidly changing for the "Big Three" too, but again, unfortunately, not quickly enough at the moment.
    These are indeed, interesting times!!
    Not blaming one side or the other--the problem isn't that simple--but I do believe the "Big Three" (at least two of them for sure) will survive in the end, but will be vastly different from the past in terms of how their businesses operate.
  • grbeckgrbeck Member Posts: 2,358
    Sorry to disappoint you hypnosis, but I never said that union members weren't human beings. Indeed, because unions ARE a creation of humans, they can do just as much harm as good. I just recognize both sides of the equation. An approach I recommend that you take to become better informed on this issue. ;)

    The problem is very simplistic thinking on this issue, as displayed on this thread, which can be boiled down to three basic ideas:

    1. Unions are good, and everything they say is absolutely true, and to be taken at face value, and they are responsible for all of the Big Three's past successes and none of their failures;
    2. Management is bad, and everything bad that has happened is management's fault;
    3. Customers are, at best, stupid, and, at worst, traitors, for not buying domestic vehicles.

    This line of thinking is not only wrong, but ultimately counterproductive in the long run.
  • grbeckgrbeck Member Posts: 2,358
    hyponsis44: This old canard was debunked ages ago!! You need to catch up. The six figure types are up in management - the one's they lay off first in a down turn because they are dead weight and over paid.

    Certain UAW members, with overtime, can make six-figure salaries.

    Here is a quote from an article in the March 20 edition of The Detroit News: "And many workers like Al Figlan, a skilled tradesman at Ford's Van [non-permissible content removed] Transmission plant, are battling their union even as they are bracing for givebacks at contract time. Figlan's overtime income has been eliminated -- a loss of about $60,000 gross annually." (emphasis added)

    If Mr. Figlan is making $60,000 annually in overtime, in addition to his base pay (which, given his seniority, I'll bet is at least $50,000), it is entirely possible that he earns a six-figure salary. And he isn' the only one.

    So your contention that only management makes that much money is clearly not supported by the facts.

    And the reason management is laid off first in downturns is that UAW contracts have no-layoff provisions. Members receive up to 95 percent of their pay even if they don't work. If management had similar protections, you can bet that the company would think twice about laying them off in a downturn.

    It has nothing to do with which employees represent "dead weight" to the company.
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Member Posts: 7,160
    If you've merely done a moderate amount of Internet surfing or cracked open a newspaper lately - just about any newspaper - you've undoubtedly seen the news that Toyota has once again passed Ford in worldwide auto sales and may pass GM sometime this year.

    But what you may not have seen is that Toyota has already passed both Ford and GM in a different category - automotive recalls.


    With all the selective research you did and all the typing you did it's very curious that you missed this tidbit. Recalls for calendar years 2004, 2005 and 2006.

    Here are the actual figures from a report in the Detroit News. Link: Summary of Recent Recalls

    Maker : GM ... DCX ... Ford ... Toy
    2004 .. 10.8 ... 5.8 ... 5.8 .. 1.1 ( Millions of vehicles )
    2005 ... 5.0 ... 1.1 ... 6.0 .. 2.2
    2006 ... 1.6 ... 2.4 ... 1.7 .. 0.8
    Totals 17.4 ... 9.3 ... 13.5 .. 4.1

    There is really nothing that can be gathered from these stats because recalls all relate to vehicles made in the past. One bad year ( GM ) skews all the figures.

    BTW, the recent Tundra/Sequoia recall of 553,000 and the other one for 600,000 are one and the same.

    BTW, the class action suit was settled this year but this is old old news ( since 2002 ). The key word in all of the articles is potentially. Millions of owners received the class action settlement notices but if they had no problems then nothing had to be done. It had no effect. Old news.
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Member Posts: 7,160
    The $1500 is only on the Reg Cab work truck, base model. They started the pricing on these at $23000 !!!! It's way off the market.

    There's nothing on the other trucks and those are moving out smartly.
  • poncho167poncho167 Member Posts: 1,178
    What people fail to realize is that by supporting these Japanese companies with their inflated yen, we are slowly leading our economy to the point of no return. Not only are these foreign companies taking their money back to their own country and investing it there, but they are also (along with China) slowly dictating the economy.

    For those who refuse to believe (or don't care according to some posters) where their money goes as long as they get what they want, the countries who accumulate the most revenue will control the economies of the world. Japan and China have started this control already and they are accumulating money at an unbelieveable pace. It won't take to many more years until they have control and our economy and current prices for goods will never be the same.
  • geo9geo9 Member Posts: 735
    Excellent post.......sad but true !!!!!!!!!!! :sick:
  • sellaturcicasellaturcica Member Posts: 145
    http://www.detnews.com/2005/autosinsider/0509/18/A01-318432.htm
    "Oscar Gray achieved the good life during 28 years of hard work at Delphi Corp. -- a six-figure income, a nice home in Holly and two vehicles."
    He was a forklift operator.
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Member Posts: 7,160
    What the heck are you talking about?

    I said that $23000 was way off the market..meaning they weren't near the market. I didn't say that they were way under the market. The market is $20K or less the new Tundra's work truck RC's are way too high. Hellooooo, if the pricing was too low would they be offering $1500 on them? uuhhhhhh I guess not.
Sign In or Register to comment.