Site News - 7/20 New Member Feature: Fewer Ads in Classifieds & More | 7/20: Saab Convention Photos | 7/11: Saab Photo of the Year Winners | New Feature: BB Daily Digest Email
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 03:39:39 GMT
From: "Dexter J" <lamealameadingdongnospamlamelame.org>
Subject: Re: Why is this newsgroup all technical troubleshooting?


Salutations: On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 02:48:55 GMT, Saab Guy <nothingnospamo.com> wrote: > > Dexter, > > I know, for years my friends and neighbors thought I was simply > ridiculous spending all sorts of money in maintaining my Saab. They were > all about "buy a new one and rid yourself of the hassle and costs, > etc.." I was telling them, they were crazy and being taken by the > company's marketing..Then again it's good to do both because without new > car sales, then the company won't be in business if everyone out there > hung onto their Saab 99. If that was the case, then Saab would basically > be a parts-only business and the model 99 for instance, would be the > last car they ever made, now that would be bad. > > Saab Guy Hah! We are just talking about that over at my local .general group - very interesting. "Really, everyone gets boned by the lowest competitive bid economy if you rely upon it exclusively." .. is about where we are at in the thread.. I guess my counter is that if the engineering cost management group cannot arrange a cost formula to provide for a 10 cent loom connector instead of a 5 cent one in manufacture as regards my earlier post about our 1993 Aero (a list $35,000 car) - then I have to take some responsibility for the Automobile in question and uprate the design in the field. Given that I have to uprate in the field to maximize my ROI as regards choosing their Brand over another - cost driven by their retail parts lists - the decision in the cost management group limits my real ability to expend future resources on newer models. That was my point early regarding SAAB's approach regarding incremental engineering improvements through the 70's and 80's. You would drive in with a car that usually hadn't expensive failed during its financing term with you - often into the 200,000km range. There was a demonstratively better model of much the same thing on the floor - which you could usually drive happily away at a similar monthly payment. Now that is not to say that there weren't some real lemons and bad service out there - but the above outlined experience was more often the case than not. They were building the Brand value at a lower rate of return to the investors - but in trade - they were able to reliably predict investor earnings over time. Then - and I think we all really share some blame here on a lot of economic fronts here - consumers everywhere started to chase the lowest competitive bid, using Branding to limit the obvious risk exposure inherent in the buying pattern. While at the same time, effectively voting with our collective Retirement and Mutual funds as regards earnings expectations which, finally, limited public capital available to enterprises engaging in lower return engineering in trade for reliable earning predictably by the early 90's. Effectively - that was really when the great 'takeover' barons decided to harvest the lower 40. And, in my opinion at least, why my Ritz cracker sux and my otherwise really very well built 1993 Aero - has a surprisingly under-engineered 5 cent connector when, clearly, it needed a 10 cent one. Like I said - I get chastised for this sort of thing every so often.. Sorry.. -- Radio Free Dexterdyne Top Tune o'be-do-da-day Johnny Favourite - Country Club http://www.dexterdyne.org/888/178.RAM all tunes - no cookies no subscription no weather no ads no news no phone in no sign up required - all the Time

Return to Main Index

The content on this site may not be republished without permission. Copyright © 1988-2021 - The Saab Network - saabnet.com.
For usage guidelines, see the Saabnet.com Mission and Purpose Page.
[Contact | Site Map | Saabnet.com on Facebook | Saabnet.com on Twitter | Shop Amazon via TSN | Site Donations]