Toyota expands -- and tends to growing pains

"Ed White" <ce.white3 DeleteThis @gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1177357457.354946.217450@y5g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
> On Apr 23, 2:29 pm, "Jeff" <n... DeleteThis @googlemail.com> wrote:
>> "Ray O" <rokigawaATtristarassociatesDOTcom> wrote in message
> .....
>> > I have never heard of an instance where an American assemnbly line
>> > worker
>> > was afraid to stop the assembly line at one of Toyota's North American
>> > plants.
>>
>> http://select.nytimes.com/search/restricted/article?res=FB0817FA3C5A0...
>
> I'd love to read this, but they want me to pay....
>
I registered for free. I suspect you can do the same.

I would post the report, but that is against copyright law.

Jeff
> Ed
>
 >> Stay informed about: Toyota expands -- and tends to growing pains 

"Ed White" <ce.white3.RemoveThis@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1177383533.339919.281280@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
> On Apr 23, 6:34 pm, "Jeff" <n....RemoveThis@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> "Ed White" <ce.whi....RemoveThis@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>
>> news:1177357457.354946.217450@y5g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...> On Apr 23,
>> 2:29 pm, "Jeff" <n....RemoveThis@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> >> "Ray O" <rokigawaATtristarassociatesDOTcom> wrote in message
>> > .....
>> >> > I have never heard of an instance where an American assemnbly line
>> >> > worker
>> >> > was afraid to stop the assembly line at one of Toyota's North
>> >> > American
>> >> > plants.
>>
>> >>http://select.nytimes.com/search/restricted/article?res=FB0817FA3C5A0...
>>
>> > I'd love to read this, but they want me to pay....
>>
>> I registered for free. I suspect you can do the same.
>>
>> I would post the report, but that is against copyright law.
>>
>> Jeff
>>
>>
>>
>> > Ed- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> Is this the same article -
> http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/21/automobiles/21auto.html
> ? I am not a lawyer, I don't play one on TV, and I didn't even stay at
> a Holiday INn last night, but I think you can legally post portions of
> the article as long as you properly attribute it.

No, it was a different article from a few weeks ago.

Jeff

> Ed
>
 >> Stay informed about: Toyota expands -- and tends to growing pains 

In article <o-qdneA8ZfTIdrHbnZ2dnUVZ_iydnZ2d.RemoveThis@ptd.net>,
"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2.RemoveThis@mailcity.com> wrote:

> That is probably why Toyota was number in recalls in 2006. Every
> manufacturer makes some that are not up to their standards on occasion.
> That is why they all offer a warranty, even Rolls Royce.
>
> When one is selling thousands, or even hundreds of thousands of anything,
> fewer of the bad once are noticed, but when you sell in the millions like
> the domestics more of the bad ones get noticed
>
> As to stopping the line, workers on domestics assembly lines can do the
> same, and have been able tot do so you at least 20 years, that I know of.
>
> mike
>
>
Yeah, but at what cost. I know someone that has dated workers at both
the Ford truck plant in Louisville and the Toyota Camry plant in
Georgetown. Here's how she summarized what her boyfriends said about the
two plants:

"If you stop the line at Toyota you get rewarded. If you stop the line
at Ford you get fired."
 >> Stay informed about: Toyota expands -- and tends to growing pains 

"Pete Moss" <spraghnum.DeleteThis@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:spraghnum-AE7468.10161225042007@news.iglou.com...

> "If you stop the line at Toyota you get rewarded. If you stop the
> line
> at Ford you get fired."

So if, because of your own incompetence, you cause a line stoppage at
Toyota, they reward you? Seems unlikely to me.

Ed
 >> Stay informed about: Toyota expands -- and tends to growing pains 

The most likely reason why the rental companies bought GM and Fords is that
GM and Fords used to own some of the large rental companies and even after
they sold them off GM and Ford gave them cars for almost nothing to keep
their factories humming. If GM or Ford gave me their cars for nothing I
would probably drive them too.



"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2.DeleteThis@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:0I-dnSiuffeBZLHbnZ2dnUVZ_jSdnZ2d@ptd.net...
> If one looks at CR reports as the percentage that it actually is, rather
> than as a list, you will discover that the number of defects in vehicles
> is at the lower end of the 2% to 3% average for all manufacturing.
> Chances of getting one of the 98% are far greater than one of the 2% that
> may have problems, one might suspect
>
> The average for all vehicles in not 2.29 but .0229%, just over 2%. The
> difference is actually not 0.21 or 0.5 problems, but .021% and .005%.
> Hardly worth spending 20% to 30% more to drive home a Toyota of a similar
> size and equipped domestic. But hey who ever said Toyota buyers were very
> astute shoppers?
>
> If you are the average new car buyer in the US you will replace it with
> another new vehicle in three to four years, with 30K to 45K on the clock.
> ANY new vehicle one buys today will easily go twice that mileage before
> needing any repairs. Why pay 20% to 30% more to drive any one home over
> any other?
>
> Most of the guy in this NG are used car buyers. They will tell you they
> bought a Toyota because the five year old domestic, they bought used ten
> years ago, broke down but the five year old Toyota they bought two years
> ago runs fine.
>
> Even it that were true, if you run a vehicle up to the more than average
> 140K, say 200K over seven years before you get another, and need to
> replace the power steering pump on the import at 120K at a cost of $200
> and you needed to change the one on your domestic
> 110K, at a cost of $120, what have you saved?
>
> They like to point to the "higher" resale value of a Toyota, yet forget
> the much higher drive home price when the purchased the Toyota. In three
> years a Toyota my be worth say $3,000 more, or $1,000 more used in seven
> years, than a domestic but at an initial drive home price of $5,000 MORE
> when new, or $3,000 MORE to buy used, which has the better resale value?
>
>
> The truth of the mater the record kept in our fleet service business,
> proved Japanese brands cost more to acquire, insure, maintain, repair and
> replace than those from domestics. On that basis Ford vehicles were by
> far the most costs effective. That is one reason few corporate fleets,
> who generally keep the vehicles in service for five years or 300K WOF
> because of federal deprecation tax laws, buy few Japanese cars and the
> reason Ford sells over 75% of the vehicles purchase by corporate fleets.
> If you look at the imports fleets do buy, with the exception of luxury
> vehicles, they are Korean cars. Few corporate fleets imported trucks.
>
> mike
>
>
>
> "C. E. White" <cewhite3.DeleteThis@removemindspring.com> wrote in message
> news:462cda64$1@kcnews01...
>>
>> "High Tech Misfit" <me.DeleteThis@privacy.net> wrote in message
>> news:1i0cjkpkgad51.dlg@hightech.misfit...
>>> Jeff wrote:
>>>
>>>> Toyota has been experiencing growing pains. They had some quality
>>>> issues in
>>>> the last few years.
>>>
>>> Yeah, but at least they have been busting their asses to rectify those
>>> quality issues, which is A LOT more than one can say for the big 3.
>>
>> Why would you say that? All the domestic manufacturers have shown
>> improved quality in recent years. Even CR has noted this. In the JD
>> Powers Rankings, Toyota is still doing well, but the difference in
>> quality has been in the noise range for years. In the 2006 JDP Initial
>> Quality Study, Toyotas averaged 1.06 problems, the industry average was
>> 1.27. I doubt 0.21 problems was statistically significant. In the 2006
>> Vehicle Dependability Study (a study of three year old models), Toyota
>> finished behind Mercury, Buick and Cadillac. The average three year old
>> Toyota had 1.79 problems. The industry average was 2.29 problems. For
>> people that trust CR, Camrys were claimed to less reliable than Ford
>> Fusions.
>>
>> Toyota builds reliable cars, but the question is, how much extra are you
>> willing to pay to avoid 0.21 or even 0.5 problems?
>>
>> Ed
>>
>
>
 >> Stay informed about: Toyota expands -- and tends to growing pains 

"Art" <begunaNOSPAMPLEASE.RemoveThis@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:RXTXh.5344$j63.5119@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> The most likely reason why the rental companies bought GM and Fords is
> that GM and Fords used to own some of the large rental companies and even
> after they sold them off GM and Ford gave them cars for almost nothing to
> keep their factories humming. If GM or Ford gave me their cars for
> nothing I would probably drive them too.

"Almost nothing" is an exaggeration, but cars were sold to rental car
companies only a little over the incremental cost to produce the vehicles.
Given the UAW contracts which required workers to be paid around 95% of
their normal wages whether they were building cars or not, it is easy to see
why Ford, GM, and Chrysler would decide to keep the workers busy building
fleet cars rather than let them sit around idly. Unfortunately, this
strategy had a very real dark side. The rental car companies turn their
fleets over very quickly, so they are constantly dumping a lot of low
mileage good condition cars on the market. These compete directly with new
cars from the domestic manufacturers. Chrysler has been particularly hard
hit because their dealers find it more profitable to sell used "program
cars" rather than new models. Ford and GM have now cut their work forces
down significantly, so the need to keep workers busy has decreased. Both
Ford and GM are cutting low profit fleet sales. This has had negative
affects on their market share, but in the long run it is a very necessary
step.

One funny thing - although Ford used to own Hertz, the only two times I
rented cars from Hertz, I got Toyotas (but the rentals were in Hawaii).

Ed
 >> Stay informed about: Toyota expands -- and tends to growing pains